FUNDAMENTAL  CHURCH 
PRINCIPLES 


JAMES  DOW  MORRISON,  D.D.,LL.D. 


331 


MS3 


GIVEN     BY 


Dean   l^oPf- 


Tnamn, 


,  "  >      >         1    1      >    3    1 

>    >  ^  ^    J   >        J 


rWE  PADDOCK  LECTUHES  Pi)^^8-V9.'^ 


Fundamental  Church 


Principles 


BY  JAMES  DOW  MORRISON,  D.D.,  LL.  D., 

MISSIONARY  BISHOP  OF  DULUTH. 


THE  YOUNG  CHURCHMAN  CO., 
Milwaukte,  Wis. 


copyright  by 

The  Young  Churchman  Co. 

milwaukee,  wis. 


Contents. 


LECTURE  I.    THE  ATTITUDE  OF  THE  CHURCH 

TOWARDS  HOLY  SCRIPTURE,  -      5 

11.    THE  CREEDS, 41 

III.  THE  SACRED  MINISTRY,  -       -       -    84 

IV.  THE  INDEPENDENCE  OF  NATION- 

AL CHURCHES,         -       -       -       -  135 


APPENDIX, 180 


28800 


1. 


Oe  JIttitttde  of  the  Cburcb  Cowards  poly 
Scripture. 

"This  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  shall  he  preached  to  all  the 
world,  for  a  witness  unto  all  nations."    S.  Matt,  xxiv,  14. 

CHE  Founder  of  the  Paddock  Lectureship  has 
indicated  the  range  of  the  subjects  to  be 
treated  from  year  to  year. 

The  lectures  are  to  deal  with  "such  central 
facts  as  the  Church's  divine  Order  and  Sacra- 
ments, her  Historical  Reformation,  and  her  rights 
and  powers  as  a  pure  and  National  Church." 
Within  these  limits  we  will  find  all  the  room  we 
care  to  occupy,  while  attempting  to  say  something 
which  may  be  helpful  to  young  men  about  to  en- 
ter on  the  solemn  duties  of  the  sacred  Ministry. 

A  great  English  Bishop  of  the  present  cen- 
tury has  said  that  among  fundamental  principles 
of  our  Church,  are  these:  The  sufficiency  of 
Holy   Scripture,   the   necessity   of   believing   the 


t  r  ,     ,  , 


6  '    ' '  '"  Fitnddmenkil' Church  Principles. 


Creeds,  which  contain  the  great  dogmas  of  the 
Catholic  church ;  the  Apostolic  Ministry  of 
Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons ;  and  the  Independ- 
ence of  I^ational  Chnrches.  The  list  is  bv  no 
means  a  complete  statement  of  Chnrch  principles ; 
but  it  mentions  vital  issues  which  we  as  loyal  sons 
of  the  Church  are  to  set  forward  and  maintain, 
in  that  field  of  service  to  which  we  have  been,  or 
may  be,  called. 

To-night  I  ask  you  to  observe  with  me  the 
attitude  of  the  Church  towards  Holy  Scripture. 

The  Church  exists  to  carry  out  the  Will  of 
our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  ful- 
fil the  prophecy;  ''This  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom 
shall  be  preached  in  all  the  world,  for  a  witness 
unto  all  nations." 

It  is  natural,  therefore,  that  it  should  take 
high  ground  in  speaking  to  us  of  that  Divine  Mes- 
sage which  it  is  commissioned  to  deliver  to  the 
world.  It  tells  us  in  one  of  its  Articles  of 
Religion  (1)  that  "Holy  Scripture  containeth  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation,  so  that  whatsoever 
is  not  read  therein,  nor  may  be  proved  thereby, 
is  not  to  be  required  of  any  man  that  it  should  be 
believed  as  an  Article  of  the  Faith,  or  be  thought 
requisite  or  necessary  to  salvation ;"  and  in  an- 
other Article   (2)    it  affirms  the  Unity  of  Holy 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church. 


Scripture;  asserting  that  "the  Old  Testament  is 
not  contrary  to  the  New,  for  both  in  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  everlasting  life  is  offered  to  man- 
kind by  Christ,  Who  is  the  only  Mediator  between 
God  and  man,"  being  both  God  and  Man. 

The  Church,  it  declares,  is  a  "congregation  of 
faithful  men  in  which  the  pure  Word  of  God  is 
preached,  and  the  Sacraments  duly  administered 
according  to  Christ's  ordinance;"  and  when  it 
deals  with  the  Authority  of  the  Church  it  con- 
fesses that  Holy  Scripture  is  supreme. 

The  Church  may  decree  Kites  and  Cere- 
monies, and  has  authority  in  controversies  of 
Faith ;  but  it  is  powerless  to  ordain  anything  con- 
trary to  God's  Word,  or  so  to  expound  one  portion 
of  Holy  Scripture  that  it  may  be  repugnant  to 
another.  The  Church  is  the  Witness  and  the 
Keeper  of  God's  Word,  and  it  njust  not  only  decree 
nothing  agi'nsi  it,  but  beyond  its  Divine  Maudatr^s 
must  enforce  nothing  to  be  believed  for  necessity 
of  salvatioa. 

The  exalted  position  that  the  Church  accords 
to  the  Word  of  God  in  its  Articles  of  Religion, 
finds  emphatic  expression  throughout  the  Prayer 
Book.  As  our  Church  was  very  "far  from  intend- 
ing to  depart  from  the  Church  of  England  in  any 
essential  point  of  discipline,  doctrine  or  worship," 


8  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

and  as  its  Calendar  follows  the  same  rule  regard- 
ing the  use  of  Holy  Scripture,  we  may  safely  say 
that  it  thoroughly  agrees  with  the  words  in  the  pre- 
face of  the  English  Prayer  Book  concerning  the 
Services  of  the  Church.  There,  we  are  told,  that 
nothing  is  ordained  to  be  read  in  the  Services  of 
the  Church  but  the  very  pure  Word  of  God,  or  that 
which  is  agreeable  to  the  same. 

It  is  asserted  that  this  was  the  godly  and 
decent  order  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  and  it  sweeps 
aside  the  uncertain  stories  and  legends,  the  multi- 
tude of  responds,  verses,  vain  repetitions,  com- 
memorations, and  synodals  that  had  usurped  so 
much  of  the  space  in  the  Divine  Service  which  be- 
longed to  Holy  Scripture,  and  it  orders  the  Curate 
to  warn  the  people  by  the  tolling  of  the  bell,  when 
service  is  about  to  begin,  that  they  may  come  to 
hear  God's  Word,  as  if  this  privilege  was  the  most 
precious  portion  of  our  heritage. 

In  the  Ordinal  we  see  the  care  the  Church 
takes,  that  its  Ministers  may  be  fitted  to  deliver 
the  Divine  message  to  the  people.  The  priest  is 
warned  that  he  cannot  compass  the  "weighty  work 
pertaining  to  the  salvation  of  men,  but  with  doc- 
trine and  exhortation  taken  out  of  Holy  Scripture, 
and  with  a  life  agreeable  to  the  same ;"  and  he  is 
commanded  to  be  studious  in  reading  and  learning 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church. 


the  Scriptures  and  in  framing  his  manners  after 
its  rule.  He  is  told  that  by  reading  and  weighing 
the  Scriptures  he  will  wax  riper  and  stronger  in 
his  Ministry ;  and  he  is  required  to  make  public 
confession  that  ''Holy  Scripture  contains  all  doc- 
trine required  as  necessary  to  eternal  salvation, 
through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ;"  and  he  pledges 
himself  to  instruct  the  people  committed  to  his 
charge  out  of  the  Holy  Scripture,  and  to  teach 
nothing  as  necessary  to  eternal  salvation  but  that 
which  he  knows  may  be  concluded  and  proved  from 
the  Word  of  God. 

The  Bishop  at  his  consecration  makes  the 
same  vow,  and  binds  himself  to  expel  from  the 
Church  all  erroneous  and  strange  doctrine  con- 
trary to  the  Divine  Message.  jSTothing  could  be 
more  impressive  than  this  testimony  from  the  Or- 
dinal concerning  the  suiBciency  of  Holy  Scripture. 

In  the  Offices  of  the  Church  we  will  find  the 
same  reverence  for  Holy  Scripture.  The  Prayer 
for  the  Church  Militant  asks  that  grace  be  given 
to  all  Bishops  and  other  Ministers,  that,  by  their 
life  and  doctrine,  they  may  set  forth  God's  true 
and  lively  Word,  and  rightly  and  duly  administer 
His  holy  sacraments.  Grace  also  is  asked  for  the 
people,  that  with  meek  heart  and  due  reverence 
they  may  hear  and  receive  God's  Holy  Word.    The 


10  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


hinderer  or  slanderer  of  God's  Word  is  warned 
away  from  the  Altar,  and  the  troubled  penitent 
is  told  to  seek  counsel  from  the  Minister  of  God's 
Word.  The  baptized  adult  is  to  use  all  diligence 
to  be  rightly  instructed  in  God's  Word  that  he  may 
grow  in  grace,  and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  live  godly,  righteously,  and 
soberly  in  this  present  world. 

God  is  asked  in  the  Confirmation  prayers  so 
to  lead  His  children  in  the  knowledge  and  obedi- 
ence of  His  Word,  that  they  may  obtain  everlast- 
ing life.  The  Marriage  Service,  passing  by  the 
decrees  of  secular  courts,  or  the  statutes  of  the 
kingdoms  of  this  world,  or  the  Canons  of  Councils 
however  venerable,  makes  God's  Word  the  supreme 
standard  of  what  is  lawful ;  the  sick  and  dying 
are  referred  to  that  which  is  written  in  Holy 
Scripture,  as  the  medicine  and  consolation  of  the 
:soul ;  and  in  the  Office  for  the  burial  of  the  dead, 
the  voice  of  tlie  Word  of  God  is  dominant  from 
first  to  last  with  its  message  of  comfort,  peace,  and 
triumph. 

Holding  this  high  doctrine  concerning  the 
sufiiciency  of  Holy  Scripture,  the  Church  places  it 
first  in  the  Altar  Service ;  and  at  the  very  begin- 
ning of  the  Christian  year,  teaches  us  to  pray  that 
we  may  so  read,  mark,  learn  and  inwardly  digest 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  11 

the  Divine  Message  that  by  "patience  and  comfort 
of  God's  Holv  Word  we  may  embrace  and  ever 
hold  fast  the  blessed  hope  of  everlasting  life," 
which  He  has  given  us  in  our  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  defend  this  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  our  Church.  The  contention 
that  ''the  written  Books  of  Holy  Scripture,  and 
the  unwritten  traditions  of  the  Church  relating 
to  faith  and  to  morals  are  to  be  received  and  vener- 
ated with  equal  feeling  of  piety  and  reverence"  our 
Church  strongly  denies ;  while  freely  allowing  the 
value  of  tradition  as  a  guide  in  the  interpretation 
of  Scripture.  Lectures  and  courses  of  study  have 
demonstrated  to  you  the  firm  ground  on  which  the 
Church  stands  in  refusing  to  tradition,  however 
venerable,  a  place  with  the  Word  of  God. 

Xor  wull  I  detain  vou  with  anv  discussion  of 
the  so-called  Higher  Criticism,  which  has  been 
busily  occupied  in  dissecting  portions  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  in  striving  to  ascertain  more  accur- 
ately the  probable  date  and  authorship  of  some  of 
the  Sacred  Books.  Very  interesting  and  instruc- 
tive have  been  the  labors  of  students  in  this  field  of 
research;  but  it  is  doubtful  if  the  result  will  be 
to  alter  in  any  appreciable  degree  the  traditional 
view  of  the  authorship  of  the  Books  of  the  Old 


12  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


Testament,  and  certainly  it  will  in  no  way  invali- 
date the  Article  of  Keligion  which  declares  that 
"the  Old  Testament  is  not  contrary  to  the  Xew, 
but  both  in  the  Old  and  Xew  Testaments  everlast- 
ing life  is  offered  to  mankind  by  Christ,  Who  is 
the  one  Mediator  between  God  and  man;  being 
both  God  and  Man.  Wherefore  they  are  not  to  be 
heard  which  feign  that  the  old  fathers  did  look 
only  for  transitory  promises." 

The  history  of  the  Criticism  of  Holy  Script- 
ure during  the  nineteenth  century  is  instructive, 
as  teaching  the  devout  student  to  maintain  an  atti- 
tude of  reserve  regarding  many  of  the  statements 
and  confident  assertions  of  the  critics.  During  a 
long  period  of  years  the  I^ew  Testament  was 
assailed  by  destructive  criticism  in  the  supposed 
interests  of  truth,  and,  thirty  years  ago,  in  how 
many  quarters  did  we  not  hear  that  the  authenti- 
city of  a  considerable  portion  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment could  not  be  successfully  maintained?  The 
boldness  of  the  attacks,  the  positiveness  of  the 
assertions  and  conclusions  of  the  critics,  the  irrev- 
erence of  the  attitude  of  many  of  those  professed 
students  of  divine  truth,  tended  in  a  very  painful 
degree  to  unsettle  men's  minds,  and  to  strengthen 
the  influences  hostile  to  the  Faith  of  our  Redeemer. 

And  when  we  consider  how  groundless   and 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  13 

trivial  this  criticism  really  was,  and  how,  after 
all,  it  has  left  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament 
unimpaired  to  the  extent  of  an  iota,  while  the  field 
is  strewn  in  all  directions  with  the  battered  wrecks 
of  the  theories  of  the  critics,  it  may  well  teach  us 
to  maintain  an  attitude  of  reserve  when  a  school  of 
criticism  once  more  assures  us  that  it  has  made 
new  discoveries  which  are  final  and  conclusive. 

The  Convocation  of  Canterbury,  perhaps  the 
most  learned  deliberative  assembly  in  the  world, 
when  its  committees  presented  the  Revised  Version 
of  Holy  Scripture,  received  the  report  and  ordered 
it  to  lie  on  the  table.  I  believe  it  is  still  lying 
there.  Time  is  vindicating  the  wisdom  of  this 
procedure,  and  we  may  with  profit  imitate  this 
temperate  example,  when  any  of  the  results  of  the 
so-called  Higher  Criticism  are  offered  for  our  ac- 
ceptance. 

Scholars  may  be  sure  that  "they  are  the 
people,  and  that  wisdom  will  die  with  them,"  but 
we  do  not  share  their  confidence,  and  we  are  aware 
that  the  last  word  in  the  controversy  has  not  been 
spoken.  After  the  Higher  Criticism  has  been 
criticised,  it  seems  most  probable  that  it  will  have 
made  very  little  alteration  in  the  traditional  view 
of  the  dates  and  authorship  of  any  of  the  Sacred 
Books. 


14  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

And  here  I  would  like  to  point  out  to  you 
another  reason  for  caution. 

The  temper  of  the  present  age  is  not  favorable 
to  sound  criticism.  It  demands  something  that 
will  startle,  and  astonish ;  a  new  discovery  that 
will  upset  previous  calculations ;  a  new  theory 
which  will  traverse  the  convictions  of  a  thousand 
years;  and  any  conjecture  of  this  nature  seems  to 
be  welcome,  although  its  proofs  be  dim  and  few, 
if  advanced  with  confident  assertion.  I  presume 
the  rapid  advance  in  the  discovery  of  new  material 
inventions  has  stimulated  this  temper,  and  has  in- 
creased the  desire  for  something  new  in  every  field 
of  research. 

But  the  children  of  this  generation,  with  all 
their  cleverness,  are  gifted  also  with  a  credulity 
that  I  believe  will  be  the  wonder  of  future  ages.  I 
do  not  think  that  the  verdict  of  the  future  will  be 
that  this  has  been  an  age  marked  by  the  discovery 
of  great  principles,  but  an  age  to  which  has  per- 
tained the  humbler  task  of  applying,  practically, 
principles  already  discovered;  not  an  age  of  gen- 
ius, but  of  clever  smartness  in  turning  the  great 
theories  of  other  days  to  useful  purposes. 

And  so  the  philosophy  of  this  age  is  apt  often 
to  rest  on  a  fallacy,  because  it  is  so  busily  occupied 
with  an  infinite  number  of  particulars,  that  it  has 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  15 

neither  time  nor  patience  to  reason  out  the  real 
ground  of  its  principles. 

How  readily  has  our  age  accepted  the  theory 
of  Evolution  and  applied  it  in  I  know  not  how 
many  directions !  And  yet  how  far  it  really  is 
from  the  demonstration  that  should  be  possessed, 
before  this  wide  reaching  theory  can  find  accept- 
ance !  A  great  many  hints  and  suggestions  which 
we  find  in  nature  have  been  accepted  as  if  they 
proved  the  theory.  Many  phenomena  seem  to  fit 
into  the  hypothesis.  But  is  it  anything  more 
than  a  guess  at  the  unknown  ?  something  that  may 
be  possibly  true,  but  which  has  yet  to  be  proved. 

And  yet  the  so-called  scientific  man  speaks  to 
us  of  the  Evolution  of  animal  life ;  from  the 
Monad  to  the  Man,  from  the  unicellular  existence 
to  that  which  Holy  Scripture  assures  us  was  made 
in  the  image  of  God.  Of  course,  to  us  Christians 
it  makes  no  difference  at  all  whether  the  theory  be 
true  or  not.  Whether  God  was  pleased  to  trans- 
form the  dust  of  the  ground  in  a  moment  into  the 
form  of  man,  or  whether  He  chose  to  attain  the 
result  through  a  myriad  of  gradual  transforma- 
tions is  of  no  consequence;  for  the  essential  crea- 
tion of  man  came  to  pass  when  into  this  man-like 
creature  the  Creator  breathed  His  own  immortal 
Spirit.     Then  man  became  a  living  soul. 


16  Fuyidamental  Church  Principles. 

The  theory  of  Evolution  has  no  effect  what- 
ever on  the  narrative  of  the  first  chapter  of  the 
Book  Genesis;  but  as  seekers  after  truth  vc^e  are 
bound  to  ask,  What  proof  has  it  to  commend  itself 
to  our  acceptance  ?  The  proof  is  meagre,  and  most 
defective.  Yet  how  widely  is  it  accepted;  the 
world  has  adopted  it.  Yet  the  world  may  be 
utterly  wrong. 

And  I  ask  you  to  observe  another  instance 
where  the  scientific  world  had  for  ages  clung  to  a 
theory,  which  had  many  hints  and  suggestions  to 
support  it,  but  which  to-day  is  looked  upon  as  a 
ridiculous  absurdity.  I  refer  to  the  search  for 
the  Philosopher's  stone. 

For  more  than  one  thousand  years,  the  scien- 
tific world  believed  this  ridiculous  theory,  which 
now  excites  your  scorn;  and,  as  late  as  this  pres- 
ent century,  as  great  a  man  as  Sir  Humphrey  Davy 
refused  to  pronounce  it  untrue.  There  were  in- 
numerable suggestions  in  the  phenomena  of  nature 
to  support  the  contention  that  metals  could  be 
transmuted,  and  that  an  elixir  of  life  could  be 
found.  But  the  hard  fact  remained  that  the  secret 
had  never  been  discovered.  That  trifling  impedi- 
ment, however,  did  not  interfere  with  the  confi- 
dence of  those  who  taught  this  doctrine,  with  the 
unanimous  support  of  the  scientific  world. 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  17 

How  like  this  is  to  the  present  theory  of 
evolution,  supported  by,  I  know  not  how  many, 
hints  and  suggestions  in  nature ;  but  like  the  the- 
ory of  the  philosopher's  stone,  traversed  by  the 
disagreeable  fact  that  species  is  found  to  be  invari- 
able. 

One  is  fascinated  by  the  theory  that  in  the 
measureless  periods  of  the  Geological  Ages  of  the 
Earth,  there  was  all  the  time  that  was  needed,  to 
produce  the  gradual,  insensible  changes  and  modi- 
fications, that  the  theory  of  the  evolution  of  spe- 
cies demands,  and  we  are  asked  to  take  for  granted 
that  under  the  law  of  natural  selection,  and  the 
principle  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  the  explana- 
tion, at  last,  is  offered  to  us  of  the  origin  of  spe- 
cies ;  but  while  almost  ready  to  give  our  assent,  we 
naturally  ask  for  a  single  demonstration,  in  all  the 
world,  of  the  truth  of  the  theory.  Alas,  the  dem- 
onstration is  wanting.  Like  the  patient  Alchem- 
ists of  old,  the  man  of  science  searches  for  the 
missing  link,  in  his  chain  of  reasoning,  but  cannot 
find  it. 

When  one  reads  a  book  like  De  Candolle's 
Origin  of  Cultivated  Plants,  he  is  reminded, 
also,  that  during  at  least  six  thousand  years,  men 
have  been  making  innumerable  experiments,  on  a 
dozen  species  of  animals,  and  two  or  three  dozen 


18  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


species  of  plants;  the  intent  being  to  change  and 
improve  the  species,  and  to  produce  something  that 
will  be  radically  different  from  the  primitive  type. 
He  has  carried  on  these  experiments  in  all  kinds  of 
climates,  in  every  variety  of  soil,  with  resources 
and  advantages  immeasurably  superior  to  those 
which  the  species  could  have  in  millions  of  years 
under  merely  natural  conditions ;  but  while  he  has 
been  able  to  produce  wonderful  varieties,  the  spe- 
cies remains  invariable,  and  the  moment  it  has  an 
opportunity  it  promptly  reverts  to  the  primitive 

type. 

What  fame  would  attend  the  gardener  who 

could  change  the  rose  into  another  flower,  or  the 

apple  into  a  different  fruit,  or  the  wheat  into  a 

different  grain  ?    But  the  species  will  not  change. 

It  is  absolutely  invariable.     It  produces  its  own 

kind,  or  it  produces  nothing.     Just  as  in  the  old 

days,  after  all  the  plain  reasoning  to  the  contrary, 

the  base  metal  at  the  Alchemist's  bidding  would 

not  turn  into  gold. 

Even  as  great  a  man  as  Hegel,  furnishes  to  us 

a  warning,  of  the  ease  with  which  analogy  may  bo 

mistaken  for  identity ;  and  the  mistakes  of  the  past 

are  a  warning  to  us  to  occupy  a  position  cf  reserve 

with    regard    to    the    unproved    hypotheses    that 

clainor  so  loudly  to  be  accepted  as  demonstrated 

facts. 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  19 

"Prove  all  things,  hold  fast  to  that  which  is 
good."  While  maintaining  a  friendly  alfitude 
towards  every  seeker  after  truth,  we  are  justified 
in  holding  to  strict  account  every  attempt  to 
change  in  any  degree  the  traditions  of  the  past. 

I  have  been  led  to  make  these  observations 
because  it  is  the  habit  of  the  majority  of  men  to 
take  their  opinions  second  hand ;  and  when  the 
advocates  of  some  new  thing  conjure  with  great 
names,  when  they  can  say,  "every  one  accepts  this, 
the  keenest  intellects  are  in  favor  of  it,"  many, 
and  especially  the  young,  are  apt  to  think  that 
this  will  serve  for  proof  of  the  theory,  or  the  prop- 
osition commended  to  them  for  acceptance. 

But  it  may  be  no  proof  at  all;  and  when  the 
history  of  the  past  furnishes  us  with  so  many 
astonishing  illustrations  of  its  fallacy,  it  warns  us 
that  our  attitude  should  be  one  of  reserve  until 
assertion  has  been  supplemented  by  positive  dem- 
onstration. And  that  should  be  pre-eminently 
our  attitude  in  our  study  of  the  Word  of  God,  by 
which  "thou  shalt  both  save  thyself  and  them  that 
hear  thee." 

Assuming  that  position,  nothing  need  disturb 
our  souls,  as  we  read  and  teach  the  Divine  Message 
which  God  has  given  us  for  the  salvation  of  men. 

The    Church    has    placed    in    our   hands    our 


20  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

English  Bible,  and  it  is  our  highest  duty  and  privi- 
lege to  proclaim  its  truth  to  men. 

The  "prayer  for  the  Church  Militant"  re- 
minds us  that  it  is  our  first  duty.  God  is  asked 
to  give  His  grace  to  all  Bishops  and  other  minis- 
ters, that  they  may,  both  by  their  life  and  doctrine, 
set  forth  His  true  and  living  Word,  and,  next  to 
that,  rightly  and  duly  administer  His  Holy  Sacra- 
ments. It  is  one  of  the  marks  of  the  Church  of 
the  living  God  that  it  is  the  Witness  and  Keeper 
of  the  Divine  Word.  If  we  judge  by  this  token, 
we  will  find  that  this  Church  of  ours  has  a  clear 
title  to  the  name  of  the  Xational  Church  of  the 
English-speaking  people. 

It  is  a  fact  generally  unknown,  and  ignored 
by  those  who  do  know  it,  that  the  world  owes  to 
our  Mother  Church,  the  Church  of  England,  the 
English  Bible;  that  wonderful  Book,  which  has 
lifted  up  our  race,  and  set  it  in  the  foremost  place 
among  the  nations.  The  English  Bible  is  an  an- 
cient book.  It  has  attained  its  present  form,  by 
many  adaptations  to  the  vernacular  of  our  race, 
but  its  origin  is  shrouded  in  mystery.  The  Eng- 
lish Bible,  as  now  read  in  our  Churches,  and  ac- 
cepted throughout  the  world,  is  the  result  of  a 
revision  made  between  the  years  1604-1611,  by 
more  than    forty  clergymen  and    laymen  of    the 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  21 

Church  of  England,  under  the  direction  of  the 
senior  Bishop  of  our  Communion,  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  It  was  exclusively  the  work  of  the 
Church.  Xo  other  religious  denomination  had 
anything  to  do  with  it. 

As  you  know,  this  version  is  accepted  and 
used  throughout  the  English-speaking  race,  by 
every  religious  denomination,  with  one  exception. 
By  whatever  name  they  call  themselves — Presby- 
terians, Methodists,  Baptists,  Congregationalists, 
etc. — they  look  to  the  Church  for  their  English 
Bible,  and  bear  testimony  that  this  Church  of  ours 
is  the  Witness  and  the  Keeper  of  the  Word  of  God. 

English-speaking  Romanists  are  the  one  ex- 
ception. After  their  secession  from  the  Xational 
Church  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  an  at- 
tempt was  made  by  them  to  provide  a  version  of 
the  English  Bible.  The  ISTew  Testament  was 
translated  and  published  at  Rheims  in  the  year 
1582,  and  the  Old  Testament  at  Douai  in  1610. 
It  was  very  unsatisfactory,  and  many  alterations 
have  been  made  in  subsequent  editions.  The 
original  translation  was  studiously  different  from 
the  English  Bible  in  its  phraseology;  but  since 
that  time  the  Douai  Bible  has  steadily  approxim- 
ated to  our  version,  until  now  whole  paragraphs 
are  practically  identical ;  a  strange,  although  un- 


22  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

willing,  confession,  that  when  the  Romanist  wants 
the  English  Bible  he  must  come  to  that  ancient 
National  Chnrch  from  which  he  seceded. 

The  relative  value  of  the  Douai  version  of  the 
English  Bible  may  be  judged  from  the  fact,  that 
nobody  ever  thought  for  a  moment  of  adopting  it, 
except  the  Romanist,  and  with  him,  it  is  a  matter 
of  necessity,  not  of  choice. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  dwell  on  the  numerous 
attempts  to  supercede  the  text  of  the  English 
Bible.  Sometimes  the  effort  has  been  made,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  Douai  Bible,  to  produce  another 
and  a  better  version ;  sometimes  the  endeavor  has 
been  to  translate  in  better  form  a  single  book,  and 
time  and  learning  have  been  used  without  stint 
to  secure  the  result. 

But  the  judgment  of  the  world  has  pro- 
nounced every  attempt  a  failure.  Our  English 
version,  which  the  Church  has  given  to  the  world, 
stands  pre-eminent  for  its  accurate  representation 
of  the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  may  chal- 
lenge favorable  comparison  in  this  respect  with  the 
Septuagint,  w^ith  the  Latin  Vulgate,  or  with  any 
other  version.  Its  language  is  its  own.  It  is  a 
Biblical  tongue,  separated  widely  from  the  col- 
loquial English  of  every  day  use,  and  from  the 
literary  English  of  other  books.     It   is  not  the 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  23 

English  of  the  Elizabethan  or  Jacobian  times,  as 
has  sometimes  been  suggested.  It  is  not  the  lan- 
guage in  common  use  in  any  age  of  our  race.  It 
is  the  voice  of  the  Church,  solemn,  simple, 
sublime,  proclaiming  God's  Message  to  the  Eng- 
lish-speaking people  which  He  had  committed  to 
its  care,  and  the  origin  of  this  Biblical  English, 
which  has  made  the  English  Bible  the  best  written 
Book  in  our  tongue,  is  an  absolute  mystery. 

Our  English  Bible  did  not  originate  with  the 
version  of  1604,  which  we  now  use.  It  had  been 
in  existence,  then,  for  nearly  one  thousand  years. 
When  the  present  version  was  prepared  the  first 
rule  laid  down  for  the  translators  was,  "that  they 
should  follow  the  ordinary  Bible  read  in  Church, 
commonly  called  the  Bishops'  Bible,  and  alter  it 
as  little  as  the  truth  of  the  original  would  permit." 
The  Bishops'  Bible  had  been  made  in  the  year 
1568  under  the  direction  of  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  the  first  rule  that  Archbishop 
Parker  made  for  the  translators  of  this  version, 
was,  "to  follow  the  common  English  translation 
used  in  the  Churches,  and  not  to  recede  from  it, 
but  where  it  manifestly  varieth  from  the  Hebrew 
or  Greek  original." 

That  "common  English  translation  used  in 
the  churches,"  followed  by  the  translators  of  the 


24  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Bishops'  Bible,  was  the  "Great  Bible"  translated 
and  published  under  the  direction  of  Cranmer, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  1535-1539, 

The  English  Bible  we  now  use  is,  therefore, 
simply  the  Bible  of  1535,  with  some  slight  verbal 
alterations.  If  we  examine,  we  will  see  that  this 
version  of  1535  was  framed  from  an  ancient  manu- 
script English  Bible.  The  private  ventures  of 
Tyndale  and  Coverdale  do  not  appear  to  have  in- 
fluenced the  translators  of  the  Great  Bible.  Cran- 
mer's  secretary  tells  us  that  the  Archbishop  took  an 
ancient  manuscript  English  Bible,  and  divided  it 
into  nine  or  ten  parts,  causing  each  part  "to  be 
writ  at  large  in  a  paper  book,"  and  then  to  be  sent 
to  the  best-learned  Bishops,  and  others,  to  the  in- 
tent that  they  should  make  a  perfect  correction 
thereof.  "And  the  same  course,  no  question,  he 
took  with  the  Old  Testament;  and  when  the  day 
came,  every  man  sent  to  Lambeth,  their  parts  cor- 
rected." 

The  old  English  manuscript  Bibles  from 
which  Cranmer's  Great  Bible  was  formed  have  for 
the  most  part  perished.  During  the  reign  of  Ed- 
ward VI.  all  the  ancient  libraries  were  destroyed. 
The  University  Library  of  Oxford,  the  library  of 
Merton  College,  that  of  the  Guildhall,  London, 
and  those  of  the  dissolved  monasteries  were  carted 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  25 

off  as  waste  paper  to  whoever  would  buy  them,  and 
the  very  shelves  and  benches  of  the  library  of  the 
University  were  sold  for  firewood.  Manuscript 
Bibles  in  Anglo-Saxon  and  early  English,  which 
they  probably  could  not  read,  would  be  the  first 
books  to  perish  at  the  hand  of  the  stupid,  malig- 
nant vandals  that  wrought  this  destruction.  But 
two  of  the  great  scholars  who  lived  in  the  times  of 
Henry  VIII.  have  told  us  of  these  old  versions  of 
our  English  Bible. 

Cranmer,  in  his  preface  to  the  Great  Bible, 
writes  in  support  of  the  vernacular  Scriptures; 
**If  the  matter  should  be  tried  by  custom,  we  might 
also  allege  custom  for  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures 
in  the  vulgar  tongue,  and  prescribe  the  more  an- 
cient custom.  For  it  is  not  much  above  one  hun- 
dred years  ago,  since  Scripture  hath  not  been  ac- 
customed to  be  read  in  the  vulgar  tongue  within 
this  realm." 

You  observe  that  the  Archbishop  refers  to  an 
ante-vernacular  epoch,  during  which  the  publish- 
ing and  reading  of  certain  editions  of  the  English 
Bible  had  been  prohibited.  He  says  this  epoch 
did  not  extend  much  beyond  one  hundred  years. 
Previous  to  that  epoch  the  English  Bible  had 
always  been  freely  used.  The  ante-vernacular' 
epoch  began  A.D.  1408,  at  a  convocation  held  in; 


26  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


that  year  in  Oxford  under  Archbishop  Arundeh 
A  canon  was  then  passed  which  decrees  and  or- 
dains that  "from  henceforth  no  unauthorized  per- 
son shall  translate  any  portion  of  Holy  Scripture 
into  English,  or  any  other  language,  under  any 
iorm  of  book,  or  treatise,  neither  shall  any  such 
l)ook  or  version,  made  either  in  Wyckliffe's  time, 
or  since,  be  read  wholly,  or  in  part,  publicly  or 
privately,  under  penalty  of  the  greater  excommun- 
ication." 

This  prohibition  was  directed,  probably, 
against  the  versions  of  the  English  Bible  published 
by  Nicholas  de  Hereford  and  John  Purvey,  1360- 
1400,  and  which  are  sometimes  called  Wyckliffe's 
Bibles.  The  social  and  political  troubles  of  Lol- 
lordism  had  called  for  severe  repressive  measures 
on  the  part  of  the  authorities,  and  these  popular 
"versions  which  were  extensively  used  by  the  Lol- 
lords,  fell  under  the  ban.  But  the  versions  of  the 
English  Bible,  published  anterior  to  the  time  of 
Wyckliffe,  were  freely  used. 

Lindewood,  the  learned  Canonist,  says  (A.  D. 
1430)  of  the  Canon  I  have  quoted  above:  "Ex  hoc 
quod  dicitur  ^noviter  compositus'  apparet  quod 
libros,  libellos,  vel  tractatus  in  Anglicis  vel  alioi- 
diomate  prius  translates  de  textu  Scripturae  legere 
non  est  prohibitum." 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  27 

You  see  he  assumes  that  versions  of  the  Eng- 
lish Bible,  much  older  than  the  so-called  Wyck- 
liffe's  Bibles,  were  in  use  among  the  people,  and  to 
this  undoubted  fact  Archbishop  Cranmer  refers,  as 
"W'ithin  the  knowledge  of  any  scholar  in  his  day,  for 
the  old  libraries  had  not  yet  been  destroyed.  "It 
is  not  much  above  one  hundred  years  ago,  since 
Scripture  hath  not  been  accustomed  to  be  read  in 
the  vulgar  tongue  within  this  realm.  And  many 
hundred  vears  before  that,  it  was  translated  and 
read  in  the  Saxon's  tongue,  which  at  that  time  was 
our  mother's  tongue,  whereof  there  remaineth  yet 
divers  copies  found  lately  in  old  Abbeys  of  such 
antique  manner  of  writing  and  speaking,  that  few 
men  now  be  able  to  read  and  understand  them. 
And  when  this  language  waxed  old,  and  out  of 
common  usage,  because  folk  should  not  lack  the 
fruit  of  reading,  it  was  again  translated  into  newer 
language,  whereof  yet  also  many  copies  remain 
and  be  daily  found." 

Foxe  says,  "Both  before  and  after  the  Con- 
quest, as  well  before  John  Wyckliife  was  born,  as 
since,  the  whole  body  of  Scripture  hath  been  by 
sundry  men  translated  into  our  country  tongue." 

Sir  Thomas  More  writes,  "The  whole  Bible 
was,  long  before  Wyckliffe's  days,  by  virtuous  and 
well   learned   men,    translated    into    the    English 


28  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


tongue,  and  by  good  and  godly  people  with  devo- 
tion and  soberness  well  and  reverently  read."  In 
another  place  More  insists  that  the  clergy  never 
kept  the  English  Bible  from  the  laity,  except  such 
translations  as  had  not  been  approved,  and  adds; 
"As  for  old  ones,  that  were  before  Wyckliffe's  days, 
they  remain  lawful  and  be  in  some  folks'  hands. 
Myself  have  seen  and  can  show  you  Bibles  fair, 
and  old,  which  have  been  known,  and  seen  by  the 
Bishops  of  the  Diocese,  and  left  in  laymen's  hands 
and  women's,  to  such  as  he  knew  for  good  and 
Catholic  folk,  that  used  it,  with  soberness  and  de- 
votion." Such  were  the  old  Bibles  in  the  English 
tongue  which  were  used  in  the  preparation  of  the 
Great  Bible  in  1535. 

A  writer  who  was  a  contemporary  of  Wyck- 
liffe  speaks  (A.D.  1398)  of  a  version  of  the  Eng- 
lish Bible  of  "Northern  speech"  which  seemed  to 
him  to  be  two  hundred  years  old.  Blunt  says, 
that  we  can  trace  nearly  the  whole  of  the  Bible 
back  into  vernacular  translations  of  the  times  be- 
tween A.D.  600  and  the  Norman  conquest.  King 
Alfred,  A.D.  850,  is  said  to  have  expressed  the 
desire  that  all  the  free-born  youth  of  the  kingdom 
should  be  able  to  read  the  English  Scriptures; 
which  shows  how  extensively  they  must  have  been 
circulated  in  his  day.     We  know  that  a  century 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  29 

earlier  Alcuiii,  at  York,  was  busy  translating  the 
Holy  Bible  into  Anglo-Saxon,  and  evidently  his 
people  had  the  Word  of  God  in  a  language  they 
could  understand,  or  he  never  would  have  said  to 
them,  "The  reading  of  Holy  Scripture  is  the 
knowledge  of  everlasting  blessedness.  The  man 
who  wishes  ever  to  be  with  God,  should  often  pray 
to  Him,  and  he  should  often  read  the  Holy  Script- 
ures. For  when  we  pray,  we  speak  to  God,  and 
when  we  read  the  Holy  Books,  God  speaks  to  us." 

We  have  still  the  translation  of  the  Psalter 
made  by  the  Bishop  of  Sherborne  before  the  year 
700 ;  and  Bede  shows  us  that  the  men  of  North- 
umbria,  gathered  around  Aidan,  at  Lindisfarne, 
as  early  as  A.D.  635  had  the  Scriptures  in  their 
mother  tongue. 

As  far  back,  then,  as  the  English  language 
can  be  traced,  we  find  our  English  Bible.  And 
there  seems  to  have  been  a  vernacular  version  in 
the  earlier  language  of  the  country,  when  Anglo- 
Saxon  was  unknoA\ai.  For  Gildas  writes  that 
when  British  martyrs  gave  up  their  lives,  for 
Christianity,  during  the  Diocletian  persecution, 
all  the  copies  of  the  Scriptures,  that  could  be 
found,  were  burned  in  the  streets. 

Thus  may  we  judge  the  attitude  of  our 
Church  towards  Holy  Scripture.     Planted  in  the 


30  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

home  of  our  English-speaking  race  in  apostolic 
days,  by  apostolic  men,  possibly  by  the  great 
apostle  of  the  Gentiles  himself,  it  has  been  faithful 
to  the  command  to  keep,  and  bear  witness  to  the 
Word  of  God.  It  has  striven  always  to  give,  to 
the  people,  God's  Word  in  the  language  which 
they  understood.  And  so  it  has  given  to  our  race 
the  English  Bible.  The  origin,  and  the  secret,  of 
the  composition  of  this  Book  no  man  can  tell ;  it 
is  best  stated,  when  we  say,  the  Church  has  given 
it  to  the  race ;  for  no  man,  and  no  generation  of 
men,  can  claim  authorship  of  the  English  Bible. 
Beyond  question,  as  a  literary  triumph,  it  is  the 
best  written  book  in  the  English  tongue,  and  it  is 
almost  the  only  successful  translation  in  the  world. 
For,  as  we  well  know,  the  charm,  and  power, 
of  a  book,  seems  to  depart,  when  we  turn  it  into 
another  language.  To  read  Shakspeare  a  man 
must  learn  English,  to  read  Homer  he  must  know 
Greek.  No  translation  can  convey  the  message  to 
us.  It  seems  like  a  dead  thing.  But  there  is  one 
exception  to  the  rule,  that  translations  are  failures. 
It  is  the  English  Bible.  It  speaks  to  men,  with 
the  fervor,  the  pathos,  the  power  of  the  Living 
Voice.  And  how  is  this  ?  I  know  of  no  adequate 
explanation  of  the  wonder  but  this :  God  has  given 
to  His  Church,  the  gift  of  tongues,  the  power  to 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  31 

convey  His  Message,  as  a  living  voice  to  men ;  and 
to  His  Church,  when  it  faithfully  strives  to  do  His 
Will,  He  continues  the  wonderful  Gift.  And  so 
this  Church  has  the  power  to  give  the  Word  of 
God  to  the  race  entrusted  to  it,  with  the  grace,  and 
power  of  the  living  voice.  Hence  the  wonderful 
power  of  the  English  Bible.  God  who  spake  by 
the  prophets,  speaks  still  by  His  Church,  and 
bestows  on  it  the  power  to  convey  His  Message  to 
the  souls  of  men. 

None  can  adequately  appreciate  the  blessing 
which  our  Church  has  bestowed  on  the  English- 
speaking  race.  It  found  our  forefathers  savages 
whose  idea  of  war  was  extermination,  men  so 
brutal,  that  neither  age,  nor  sex  was  spared  in 
their  fury,  so  degraded,  that  they  bartered  their 
fair-haired  daughters  to  the  Moors.  And  it  has 
lifted  up  our  race  until  it  stands  in  the  front  of 
all  the  ISTations  of  the  earth,  not  only  in  power,  but 
in  righteousness,  in  fair  dealing  between  man  and 
man,  in  its  reverence  for  law,  in  its  guardianship 
of  human  freedom,  in  its  hatred  of  oppression,  of 
wrong  doing,  of  crime.  In  that  long,  toilsome, 
upward  march  of  the  race,  the  Church  has  been  the 
teacher  and  the  leader. 

It  was  the  Church,  headed  by  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  that    was    foremost    in    securing 


32  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Magna  Charta,  which  Hallam  calls  the  key  stone 
of  English  liberty,  and  of  which  he  says:  "If 
every  subsequent  law  was  swept  away,  there  would 
still  remain  the  bold  features  that  distinguish  a 
free  from  a  despotic  monarchy." 

"Two  great  men,"  he  adds,  "may  be  con- 
sidered as  entitled,  beyond  the  rest,  to  the  glory  of 
this  monument — Stephen  Langton,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  William  Earl,  of  Pembroke.  To 
their  temperate  zeal  England  is  indebted  for  the 
two  greatest  blessings  a  patriotic  statesman  could 
confer ;  the  establishment  of  civil  liberty,  on  an 
immovable  basis,  and  the  preservation  of  Xational 
Independence." 

It  is,  to  that  ancient  source,  that  we  go  back, 
for  the  principles  enshrined  in  our  own  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  and  wherever,  in  the  world, 
to-day,  you  find  a  community  of  English-speaking 
men,  there  you  will  find  the  principles  of  Magna 
Charta,  which  the  Church  in  the  dark  days  of  old, 
won  for  the  race.  In  the  uplifting  of  our  race,  the 
Church  has  been  the  blessed,  and  efficacious  instru- 
ment. 

And  if  we  ask  the  means  which  it  has  em- 
ployed, to  bring  about  this  result,  I  answer,  that  it 
has  been  the  faithfulness  of  the  Church  in  reading, 
in  teaching,  in  publishing  the  English  Bible.     The 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  33 

sword  of  the  Spirit  is  the  Word  of  God.  We  can 
see,  with  what  unwearied  faithfuhiess,  the  Church 
has  given  the  Word  of  God,  to  the  English-speak- 
ing race,  in  a  language  they  could  understand. 
And  if  the  Service  of  God  is  perfect  freedom,  and 
if  the  throne  of  law  is  the  Bosom  of  God ;  need  we 
any  better  explanation,  of  that  passion  for  person- 
al freedom,  and  that  reverence  for  Constitutional 
law,  which  are  so  characteristic  of  our  race,  than 
the  fact,  that  age  after  age,  from  the  cradle  to  the 
grave,  the  Church  has  faithfully  taught  us  the 
Word  of  God? 

As  a  rule,  the  English-speaking  race  is  pro- 
foundly ignorant  of  the  debt  it  owes  to  the  Church. 
How  many  among  them  know,  that  it  is  the  Epis- 
copal Church  from  which  they  have  received  the 
English  Bible  'I  Indeed,  how  many  of  our  own 
people  seem  to  be  aware  of  the  fact  ?  Truth  may 
be  very  close  to  a  man  and  yet  he  may  be  utterly 
ignorant  of  it. 

I  remember,  one  day,  when  a  good  man,  of  a 
ccriain  Christian  denomination  was  speaking  to 
me,  and  unconsciously  showed  his  scorn  of  the 
Church,  how  amazed  he  was  when  I  asked  him  to 
turn  to  the  table  of  contents  of  his  hymn-book, 
and  note  the  authorship  of  the  hymns.  Out  of 
335  names,  165  were  those  of  writers  of  the  Epis- 


34  Fundamentat  Church  Frinciples. 

copal  Church.  Here  was  a  man,  who  knew  not 
that  he  owed  anything  to  the  Church,  who  pitied  it 
for  its  want,  as  he  thought,  of  spiritual  life; 
and  yet,  whenever  he  wished  to  lift  up  his  heart  in 
praise  to  God,  to  that  Church  rather  than  to  his 
own  denomination,  or  to  all  others,  combined,  he 
instinctively  turned,  to  supply  him  with  fitting 
expressions  of  praise,  and  prayer,  and  thanks- 
giving. You  may  think,  then,  how  grea't  was  his 
astonishment,  when  he  found  that  to  that  Church, 
also,  he  owed  his  much  loved,  well  read  English 
Bible. 

The  claim,  that  this  Church,  by  the  common 
consent  of  all  men,  is  the  Steward  of  the  Word  of 
God  to  the  English-speaking  race  is  one  that  we 
have  the  right  to  proclaim.  Not  without  pains, 
and  toil,  has  this  Church,  in  the  past,  set  forth  the 
English  Bible,  before  the  world.  The  sons  of  the 
Church,  have  dared,  and  suffered  all  things  to  ful- 
fil this  duty. 

I  have  stood  in  the  street  of  Oxford  at  the 
Martyrs'  Memorial,  where,  in  the  dark  days,  when 
strenuous  effort  was  being  made  to  destroy  the 
power  of  the  Church  to  teach  the  English  Bible, 
two  of  our  Bishops  laid  down  their  lives  for  a  testi- 
mony, and  the  one  cheered  the  other,  as  they  went 
to     the     stake,     saying,     "Be     of     good     cheer, 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  35 

brother;  we  shall,  to-day,  light  a  candle  in  Eng- 
land, which  shall  never  be  put  out." 

True  prophecy  of  a  loyal  heart!  how  abun- 
dantly it  has  been  proved !  It  is  going  on  four  cen- 
turies since  then,  and  the  light  of  that  English 
Bible,  for  which  they  died,  shines  not  only  in  Eng- 
land, but  over  all  the  earth,  wherever  that  domi- 
nant race  has  made  its  home. 

To  us,  in  God's  Providence,  there  has  come 
the  high  calling  of  God,  to  take  that  lamp  of  truth 
from  the  faithful  hands  of  a  past  generation,  to 
hold  it  high  before  the  world,  and  hand  it  on,  to 
those  who  shall  follow  us,  undimmed  by  faithless- 
ness, or  cowardice,  or  indolence. 

We  are  ministers  of  God's  Word.  It  is  our 
Message  to  a  sinful,  needy  world. 

We  cannot  magnify  too  greatly  the  grandeur 
of  our  Commission.  For  this  Divine  Word  en- 
trusted to  us,  is  the  Power  of  God  unto  Salvation 
to  every  one  that  believeth.  So  important  does 
the  Church  consider  this  duty,  so  necessary  an  ade- 
quate and  constant  preparation  for  it,  that  it 
pledges  us,  at  our  ordination,  to  make  the  Word  of 
God  the  great  study  of  our  whole  life  time.  "Will 
you  be  diligent  in  prayers,  and  in  reading  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  and  in  such  studies  as  help  to  a 
knowledge  of  the  same,  laying  aside  the  study  of 


36  FnndamentaJ  Church  Principles. 

the  world  and  the  flesh  ?"  And  we  solemnly  reply, 
"I  will  endeavor  myself  so  to  do,  the  Lord  being 
my  helper." 

Using  our  Prayer  Book  as  our  commentary, 
and  guide,  we  must  study  our  Bible  until  its  page 
shall  be  an  open  book,  to  our  mind,  and  from  an 
intellect  saturated  with  the  inspired  Message,  we 
can  deliver  it  to  the  world.  Our  sermons  and  in- 
structions should  reflect  our  study  of  Holy  Script- 
ure, in  their  aptness  to  draw  from  its  exhaustless 
stores,  the  arrows  of  truth  to  pierce  the  sinful  con- 
science ;  and  the  doctrine,  reproof,  correction,  and 
instruction  in  righteousness  which  are  the  marks 
of  the  man  of  God,  thoroughly  furnished,  unto  all 
good  works. 

Often  one  hears  very  harsh  criticisms  of  ser- 
mons, and  probably  a  good  deal  of  it  is  well  de- 
served. If  the  aim  of  the  sermon  is  to  magnify 
oneself,  or  if  it  is  of  such  a  character,  that  it  can- 
not be  regarded  as  the  Divine  Message  which  the 
Blessed  Redeemer  has  commissioned  us,  His  or- 
dained servants,  to  deliver  to  men,  none  can  brand 
its  unworthiness  too  harshly.  But,  if  in  obedience 
to  our  ordination  vow,  we  seek  in  our  sermons,  out 
of  Scripture,  to  instruct  the  people  committed  to 
our  charge,  we  are  fulfilling,  whatever  men  may 
say  of  us,  one  of  the  highest  of  our  duties.     The 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  37 

truly  valuable  preacher  is  the  man  who  thoroughly 
believes,  and  accurately  knows  the  English  Bible. 

Mr.  Baring  Gould  in  his  book,  "Post  Medi- 
aeval Preachers,"  discusses  the  religious  movement 
which  checked  and  overwhelmed  the  Huguenot 
party  in  France,  and  he  attributes  the  success 
attained  to  the  preaching  of  the  Romanist  clergy. 
Sacred  eloquence,  he  says,  is  the  most  powerful 
engine  known  for  influencing  multitudes ;  and  the 
Catholic  clergy  resolutely  cultivated  it,  and  used  it 
with  as  much  success  as  Chrysostom,  Gregory,  or 
Augustine. 

He  goes  on  to  tell  how  diligently  they  drew  on 
the  patristic  stores  of  theology  and  the  exhaustive 
commentaries  on  every  word  of  Scripture  which 
great  scholars  of  former  ages  had  prepared.  And 
he  remarks  that  the  main  contrast  between  Roman 
Catholic  sermons  and  those  of  Protestant  divines 
in  that  age  consists  in  the  wonderful  familiarity 
with  Scripture,  exhibited  by  the  former,  and  the 
scanty  use  made  of  it,  by  the  latter.  It  was  not, 
he  tells  us,  that  these  Romanist  preachers  affected 
the  quoting  of  texts,  but  they  seemed  to  think,  and 
speak  in  the  words  of  Scripture,  without  an  effort, 
and  their  Scriptural  illustrations  are  not  confined 
to  one  or  two  books,  but  evenly  selected  from  the 
whole  Bible. 


38  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


Here,  then,  we  have  the  secret  of  effective 
preaching.  And,  as  I  have  pointed  out,  it  is  the 
method  which  the  Church  commands  us  all  to  fol- 
low. It  pledges  us  to  be  accurate  and  diligent 
students  of  the  Bible,  and  out  of  these  Scriptures 
to  instruct  our  people.  But  the  command  is  sadly 
neglected,  and  to  this  neglect  we  may  rightly  at- 
tribute the  feebleness  of  the  pulpit. 

I  ask  you  never  to  rest  satisfied  until,  as  the 
result  of  study,  the  whole  range  of  the  Word  of 
God  is  within  the  grasp  of  your  mind,  so  that  you 
could  give  at  any  time,  in  your  own  words,  a  com- 
prehensive analysis  of  any  Book  of  the  Bible ;  or, 
so  that  you  could  draw  at  will,  from  any  portion 
of  it,  the  weapons  you  require  in  your  warfare 
with  evil.  I  have  said  that  your  Prayer  Book  is 
your  commentary.  You  will  find  that  it  draws 
impartially  from  every  portion  of  the  Word  of 
God,  and  by  following  it  closely  in  your  study  of 
the  Bible,  you  will  be  saved  from  the  one-sidedness 
which  has  prevented  so  many  good  men  from 
prophesying  according  to  the  proportion  of  the 
Faith. 

May  I  also  add,  that  in  delivering  the  Word 
of  God  in  the  services  of  the  Church,  we  ought  to 
be  sure  that  we  are  able  to  read  it.  The  complaint 
is  often  made  that  clergymen  read  the  Service  and 


The  Attitude  of  the  Church.  39 

the  Lessons  from  Holy  Scripture  in  a  manner  that 
does  not  conduce  to  edification.  Too  frequently 
it  is  an  accurate  criticism,  but  is  it  not  a  crime, 
and  a  shame  that  any  clergyman  should  be  justly 
liable  to  this  censure  ? 

In  your  preparation  for  the  Sacred  Ministry, 
you  must  at  any  pains  secure  such  training,  that 
when  you  read  the  Word  of  God  in  the  congrega- 
tion, it  shall  be  with  such  reverent  distinctness  and 
intelligence  that  your  solemn  message  will  be 
clearly  conveyed  to  every  one  among  your  hearers. 

Once,  a  person  said  to  me,  of  a  clergyman, 
"I  love  to  hear  him  read  the  Lessons.  He  reads 
them  as  if  the  Bible  was  the  most  solemn  and  won- 
derful thing  in  the  world."  It  was  a  strange  but 
accurate  criticism  of  one  of  the  best  readers  in  the 
ranks  of  the  clergy.  Remember,  then,  that  people 
will  expect  that  you  will  be  able  to  read  the  Bible. 
Do  not,  by  inattention  to  lessons  in  elocution, 
come  unprepared  to  the  work  of  the  Ministry. 

Lastly,  my  brethren,  remember  that  if  you 
are  to  be  faithful  ministers  of  the  Word  of  God, 
your  personal  character  must  reflect  the  Divine 
Word,  as  the  mirror  reflects  the  face.  Our  char- 
acter, and  our  conversation  should  be  an  epistle 
known  and  read  of  all  men. 

When  you  enter  on  your  ministry  you  will 
often  be  watched  by  unfriendly  eyes.     But  if  you 


40  Fundamental  ChurcJi  Principles. 

are  diligent  to  frame  your  life  according  to  the 
Doctrine  of  Christ,  men  will  take  knowledge  of 
you,  that  you  have  heen  with  Jesus.  They  will 
see  that  you  live  as  you  pray;  when  before  the 
Altar  you  ask  for  God's  grace  that  both  in  your 
life  and  doctrine  you  may  set  forth  His  true  and 
living  Word. 


II. 
Cbe  Creeds, 

''The  Faith  which  toas  once  delivered  unto  the  Saints."   Jude  3. 

BELIEF  ill  the  Creeds,  as  containing  the  great 
dogmas  of  the  Catholic  Church,  is  a  funda- 
mental principle  of  our  Communion.  The  Atha- 
nasian  Creed  opens  -svith  the  declaration :  "Whoso- 
ever will  be  saved,  before  all  things  it  is  necessary 
that  he  hold  the  Catholic  Faith,"  and  as  the  pre- 
face of  the  Prayer  Book  solemnly  insists,  "that 
this  Church  is  very  far  from  intending  to  depart 
from  the  Church  of  England  in  any  essential  point 
of  doctrine,  discipline  or  worship,"  we  may  as- 
sume, that  the  preface  of  the  Athanasian  Creed 
accurately  represents  the  Mind  of  the  Church  con- 
cerning the  Creeds. 

In  the  Eighth  Article  of  Religion,  the  same 
truth  is  put  in  another  form : 


42  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


"The  Nicene  Creed,  and  that  which  is  com- 
monly called  the  Apostles'  Creed,  ought  thoroughly 
to  be  received,  and  believed;  for  they  may  be 
j)roved  by  most  certain  warrants  of  Holy  Script- 
ure." The  last  clause  makes  the  Article  consis- 
tent with  that  other  fundamental  principle,  that 
■"Holy  Scripture  containeth  all  things  necessary  to 
Salvation,  so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  therein, 
nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  required  of 
-any  man,  that  it  should  be  believed  as  an  Article 
of  the  Faith,  or  be  thought  requisite,  or  necessary 
to  salvation." 

The  Church  in  its  care  for  the  souls  of  men, 
closely  follows  the  principle,  that  to  believe  God's 
Word,  is  to  believe  the  Creed,  and  that  faith  in  the 
Creed  is  necessary  to  Salvation. 

In  Holy  Baptism,  when  about  to  receive  into 
the  Church  those  who  have  been  conceived  and 
born  in  sin,  and  who  must  be  regenerate  and  born 
anew  of  water,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  if  they  would 
enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  God,  it  makes  belief  in 
God's  Holy  Word,  that  is  to  say  belief  in  the  Creed, 
an  absolute  pre-requisite,  before  administering  the 
Sacrament.  The  baptized  is  warned  either  per- 
sonally, or  if  an  infant,  by  his  sureties,  that  he 
must  faithfully  promise  that  he  will  constantly 
believe  God's  Holy  ^Yo7'd,    and    therefore    is    re- 


The  Creeds.  43 


quired  to  answer  the  question,  "Dost  thou  believe 
all  the  Articles  of  the  Christian  Faith  as  contained 
in  the  Apostles'  Creed  ?" 

In  the  closing  exhortation,  provision  is  ex- 
pressly made,  that  the  child  shall  be  taught  the 
Creed,  as  part  of  his  "solemn  vow,  promise,  and 
profession."  In  the  Catechism  he  is  taught,  that 
part  of  his  bounden  duty  is  to  believe  all  the  Ar- 
ticles of  the  Christian  Faith,  and  heartily  to  thank 
his  Heavenly  Father  who  has  brought  him  to  this 
state  of  Salvation ;  and  to  pray  that  by  His  grace 
he  may  continue  in  the  same,  to  his  life's  end.  In 
Confirmation,  before  God  and  the  congregation, 
he  vows  to  believe  the  Faith  of  Baptism. 

And  the  Faith  which  the  Church  so  carefullv 
teaches  its  children  they  are  never  permitted  to 
•forget.  The  Confession  of  this  Faith  is  made  a 
duty  in  every  act  of  worship,  and  the  plain  com- 
mand is  given :  "Then  shall  be  said  the  Apostles' 
Creed  by  the  minister  and  people,  standing."  At 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  the  Creed  is  to  be  con- 
fessed after  the  Gospel,  and  on  certain  days  of  the 
year,  the  confession  must  be  made  in  the  more 
exact  terminology  of  the  Xicene  Symbol. 

And  when  in  God's  Providence  we  are  laid  on 
the  bed  of  sickness,  the  Church  sends  to  us  its  mes- 
sage by  the  hand  of  its  minister,  and  part  of  his 


44  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


discipline,  and  medicine  for  our  soul,  is  the  solemn 
confession  of  our  faith,  under  circumstances  of  the 
most  affecting  nature. 

"Forasmuch  as  after  this  life  there  is  an 
account  to  be  given  unto  the  Righteous  Judge,  by 
whom  all  must  be  judged  without  respect  of  per- 
sons, I  require  you  to  examine  yourself,  and  your 
estate,  both  toward  God  and  man,  so  that  accusing 
and  condemning  yourself  for  your  own  fault,  you 
may  find  mercy  at  our  Heavenly  Father's  hand  for 
Christ's  sake,  and  not  be  accursed  and  condemned 
in  that  fearful  judgment.  Therefore  I  shall  re- 
hearse to  you  the  Articles  of  our  Faith,  that  you 
may  know  whether  you  do  believe,  as  a  Christian 
man  should,  or  no."  And  after  the  recitation  of 
the  Creed,  the  sick  person  confesses,  "All  this  I 
steadfastly  believe." 

Thus,  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave,  does  the 
Church  seek,  that  the  petition  of  the  thanksgiving 
of  the  baptismal  service  may  be  fulfilled,  "In- 
crease this  knowledge,  and  confirm  this  faith  in  us 
evermore."  We  are  taught  to  pray,  that  we  may 
depart  this  life  in  the  confidence  of  a  certain  faith ; 
and  at  the  grave  Ave  give  God  thanks  for  all  His 
servants  who  have  finished  their  course  in  faith, 
and  beg  that  we  may  have  our  portion    in    the 


The  Creeds.  45 


blessed  company  of  them  who  are  departed  in  the 
true  faith  of  God's  Holy  Name. 

Thns  does  the  Church  bear  its  unequivocal 
testimony  to  the  preface  of  the  Athanasian  Creed : 
''Whosoever  will  be  saved,  before  all  things  it  is 
necessarv  that  he  hold  the  Catholic  Faith." 

We  may  say  of  the  Creeds  what  the  Church 
says  of  the  Holy  Sacraments,  that  they  are  means 
of  grace.  We  must  never  lose  sight  of  the  end 
while  thinking  of  the  means.  The  Church  of  the 
Living  God ;  the  Holy  Scripture,  the  Creeds,  the 
Sacraments,  are  means  employed  by  the  Son  of 
God  to  attain  a  certain  result. 

When  He  ascended  upon  high  He  gave  gifts 
to  men,  apostles,  evangelists,  prophets,  pastors, 
and  teachers,  "for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for 
the  work  of  the  ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the 
Body  of  Christ,  till  we  all  come  in  the  unity  of  the 
faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God, 
unto  a  perfect  man;  unto  the  measure  of  the 
stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ." 

This  is  the  end  to  be  achieved ;  the  formation 
of  a  royal  generation,  in  the  likeness  of  the  great 
King,  whom  He  will  not  be  ashamed  to  call  His 
brethren.  The  preaching  of  the  Gospel  is  in- 
tended to  make  men  like  our  Blessed  Master,  and 
that  preaching    is  successful  in    proportion  as  it 


46  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

forms  the  reflection  of  Christ's  image,  in  the  char- 
acter and  habits  of  those  who  hear  it. 

In  its  essence,  Christianity  consists  of  the 
Life,  the  Character  and  the  teaching  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  It  delineates  the  true  relations  of 
man  to  his  God,  and  to  his  fellow  man,  and  dis- 
plays a  Life  in  which  those  relations  were  per- 
fectly realized.  This  blessed  Life  is  set  be- 
fore us  for  imitation.  The  Saviour  Himself 
calls  to  us  to  follow  Him.  Xecessarily  with  the 
delineation  of  the  Saviour's  life,  there  followed 
some  explanation  of  the  Xature  of  His  Being ;  and 
so,  along  with  the  picture  of  His  pure  and  holy 
life,  instructions  were  added,  concerning  His  rela- 
tions to  the  Eternal  Father  and  to  the  sons  of  men. 

This  teaching  was  j)lain,  and  simple,  and 
adapted  by  the  resources  of  infinite  wisdom  to  the 
feeble  faculties  of  man,  yet  necessarily  it  dealt 
with  the  most  profound  mysteries  in  the  universe, 
and  hence  arose  the  main  difficulties  of  the  early 
ages  of  Christianity.  The  human  mind  found  in 
the  gospel  message  the  deep  things  of  God,  which 
at  one  moment  fascinated  and  baffled  the  human 
intellect,  as  it  vainly  strove  with  its  fitful  specula- 
tions to  measure  the  Infinite  with  the  hand- 
breadths  of  human  understanding. 


The  Creech.  47 


Hence  arose  the  innumerable  heresies  that 
troubled  the  souls  of  men  in  the  early  ages  of 
Christianity.  And  during  the  first  five  centuries, 
the  Church  was  compelled  to  face  the  burning 
questions  of  the  hour,  and  to  state  the  principal 
doctrines  of  the  Christian  Faith  in  distinct,  dog- 
matic form.  The  false,  or  inadequate,  statement 
of  the  heretical  teacher,  had  to  be  met  by  a  clear 
and  true  statement  of  the  mysteries  of  the  Faith. 
The  work  was  necessary,  inevitable,  although  it 
was  not  congenial  to  the  Christian  temper;  nor 
destitute  of  danger  to  the  spiritual  life  of  the 
Church. 

The  Creed  of  the  Church  has  ever  been  the 
same,  although  not  expressed  at  first  with  that  ex- 
actness which  heresy  compelled  the  Church  pres- 
ently to  employ.  The  philosophical  gnostics  com- 
pelled Churchmen  to  revise  their  position,  and  to 
state  with  accuracy  the  mind  of  the  Church  on  the 
Articles  of  the  Faith.  The  struggle  with  error 
might  be  protracted,  but  the  victory  of  the  truth 
was  never  doubtful;  and  at  length  the  completed 
Nicene  symbol  declared  against  every  adversary 
the  verities  of  the  Catholic  Faith. 

We  know  it  has  been  asserted  that  as  time 
went  on  the  Church  greatly  modified  the  Faith ; 
that  the  earliest  form  of  the  Creed  contained  ar- 


48  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

tides  of  belief  in  excess  of  the  Apostolic  teaching, 
and  that  interpretations  were  put  on  the  primitive 
faith  by  later  generations  of  Christians  that  did 
not  exist  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church's  history. 

The  local  Creed  of  the  early  Christians  at 
Rome  is  at  least  as  old  as  the  middle  of  the  second 
century.  From  that  primitive  document  the 
Apostles'  Creed  has  been  gradually  evolved ;  other 
churches,  feeling  themselves  under  no  obligation 
to  adhere  to  the  letter  of  the  Roman  Creed,  and 
modifying,  and  adding  to  its  clauses,  some  of  these 
additions  being  as  late  as  the  seventh  century. 
But  none  of  those  additions  modified  in  any  degree 
the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints,  or  can  be 
regarded  as  a  departure  from  primitive  belief. 

It  has  been  asserted  that  the  Trinity  of  the 
second  century  was  essentially  unequal;  that  it 
included  a  Father,  whose  paternal  relation  was 
that  of  the  Creator  of  Xature ;  a  Son  whose  filial 
relation  began  with  His  human  life;  and  an  im- 
personal Spirit,  the  Energy  of  the  Father,  and  of 
the  Son. 

But  in  reality  these  false  conceptions  were 
creations  of  the  third  and  fourth  centuries,  which 
were  denounced  by  the  Catholic  Church  as  soon  as 
their  nature  was  clearly  seen.  The  theology  of 
the  Church  is  indebted  to  Christian  teachers  of  the 


The  Creeds.  49 


fourth  century  for  much  of  its  philosophical  form 
and  literary  dress,  but  its  substance  has  always 
been  the  teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  and  His 
Apostles,  jealously  preserved,  and  gradually  as- 
similated by  successive  generations  of  the  Faith- 
ful. 

The  Fatherhood  of  God  expressed  in  the 
Creed  was  not  a  mere  fatherly  relation  to  Nature, 
but  a  special  relation  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
members  of  His  Church.  Clement  speaks  of  Him 
as  "our  loving  and  compassionate  Father  (ad  Cor. 
C.  29).  Ignatius  dwells  almost  exclusively  on  the 
relation  of  the  Divine  Father  to  our  Lord  (ad 
Magn.  1.  3.  7.  8.)  ;  and  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus  is 
emphatic  in  its  statement  of  the  mission  of  the 
only  Son  of  God.  "As  a  King  sends  His  Son,  who 
is  also  a  King,  so  sent  He  Him,  as  God  He  sent 
Him  (the  word  "God"  is  in  the  accusative,  and 
refers  to  the  person  sent)  (ws  6 thy  eirefuj/ev) ; 
as  to  men  He  sent  Him,  as  a  Saviour  He  sent  Him 
(Ep.  ad  Diog.  C.  7).  Justin  Martyr  says  that 
Jesus  is  "the  Word  of  God,  born  of  God  in  a  pecu- 
liar manner,  differing  from  ordinary  generation." 

Expressions  like  these  from  Christian  writers 
of  the  period  anterior  to  the  date  when  the  Creed 
is  supposed  to  have  been  formulated,  sufficiently 
attest  the  belief  in  the  Divine  Fatherhood,  as  spe- 


50  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

ciallj  relating  to  Jesiis  Christ  and  the  members 
of  His  Church.  Xor  is  it  true  that,  when  the 
Creed  was  formulated  in  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  Christians  had  not  begun  to  claim  for 
Jesus  Christ  a  Sonship  anterior  to  His  human  life. 

Justin  Martyr,  in  his  dialogue  with  Trypho, 
comments  on  the  twenty-second  Psalm  as  relating 
the  suffering  and  death  of  Christ,  and  goes  on  to 
say :  "I  have  already  proved  that  He  was  the  Only- 
begotten  of  the  Father,  of  all  things,  being  begot- 
ten in  a  peculiar  manner  Word  and  Power  by 
Him,  and  having  afterwards  become  man,  through 
the  Virgin."  Aristides,  writing  his  apology  some 
twentv-five  years  earlier,  savs  that  "Christians 
trace  their  origin  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  He  is  ac- 
knowledged by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  be  the  Son  of 
the  Most  High  God,  who  came  down  from  heaven 
for  the  salvation  of  men." 

Lightfoot  has  shown  that  Ignatius  held  sub- 
stantially the  same  views  as  the  Nicene  Fathers 
concerning  the  Person  of  Christ.  One  quotation 
must  suffice,  but  that  is  sufficient  for  our  purpose. 

"We  have  a  physician,  the  Lord  our  God, 
Jesus  the  Christ  the  only  begotten  Son  and  Word 
before  time  began,  but  who  afterwards  became 
Man  through  the  Virgin" (Ep  ad  Eph.  C.  7). 


The  Creeds.  51 


The  early  Christian  writers  were  not  pro- 
found theologians,  and  the  Divine  generation,  in- 
volved in  the  fact  of  the  Divine  Sonship,  may  not 
have  been  clear  in  their  minds,  but  it  is  plain  they 
believed  in  the  ^'Only-begotten  Son  before  time  be- 
gan," who  afterwards  took  our  nature  upon  Him. 

It  has  also  been  asserted  that  the  Christians 
of  the  second  century  regarded  the  Holy  Ghost, 
not  as  a  Person,  but  as  a  Gift,  or  Power.  "No 
proof,"  says  one  writer,  ''can  be  shown  that  about 
the  middle  of  the  second  century  the  Holy  Ghost 
was  believed  in,  as  a  Person."  The  terminology 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity  was  by  no 
means  fixed  and  uniform,  even  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury ;  and  when  we  interrogate  writers  of  the  age 
following  the  Apostles,  all  we  expect  to  find,  is 
consciousness  of  a  distinction  between  the  Father 
and  the  Spirit,  like  that  between  the  Father  and 
the  Son. 

And  does  not  Clement,  writing  fifty  years  be- 
fore the  middle  of  the  second  century,  betray  the 
consciousness  of  this  declaration  when  he  says, 
"Have  we  not  one  Father,  and  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  one  Spirit  of  Grace"  (Ep  ad  Cor.  C. 
46),  or  when  he  exclaims  "As  God  lives,  and  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  lives,  and  the  Holy  Spirit"  (Ad 
Cor.  C.  58).  (Vid.  Lightfoot,  Ap.  Fathers,  Pt.  I., 


52  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

ii,  169)  ?  Had  not  the  Personality  of  the  Spirit 
been  part  of  the  Christian  doctrine  for  a  long  per- 
iod when  the  Christians  of  Lyons,  A.D.  177,  said 
of  one  of  their  martyred  brethren,  "He  was  called 
the  Christian's  advocate,  and  he  had  the  Advocate 
( napaKXT/ToA )    in  himself"  ? 

When  tlie  heresy  of  Praxeas  arises  a  little 
later,  and  calls  for  an  accurate  expression  of  the 
Faith  that  the  Christians  had  always  held  regard- 
ing the  Holy  Spirit,  TertuUian  instantly  asserts 
that  "the  Father  is  one,  the  Son  is  one,  and  the 
Spirit  is  one,  and  that  they  are  distinct  from  Each 
Other."  It  was  no  new  doctrine,  but  the  same 
Faith  which  Clement  had  held  a  century  earlier, 
only  restated,  against  a  new  heresy,  in  sharp  and 
decisive  terms. 

It  has  also  been  asserted  that  the  Virgin  birth 
of  our  Saviour,  did  not  have  a  place  in  the  earliest 
Gospel  preaching,  although  it  became  a  tradition 
anions;  Christians  at  an  earlv  date.  There  is  no 
question  about  the  early  date  of  the  tradition. 
Justin  Martyr  asserts  again  and  again  that  our 
Lord  was  born  of  a  Virgin,  and  denounces  "those 
of  our  race"  (the  Ebionites)  for  asserting  that  He 
is  "a  man  born  of  men." 

The  Apology  of  Aristides  was  presented  to 
the  Emperor  Hadrian  at  Athens,  A.D.  125.     In  it 


The  Creeds.  53 


we  read:  ''The  Christians  trace  their  origin  from 
the  Lord  Jesns  Christ,  and  He  is  acknowledged  by 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  be  the  Son  of  the  Most  High 
God,  who  came  down  from  heaven  for  the  salva- 
tion of  men,  and  being  born  of  a  pure  virgin,  uube- 
gotten  and  immaculate.  He  assumed  flesh,  and 
revealed  Himself  among  men"  (C.  15). 

Ignatius  says:  "Jesus  Christ  was,  according 
to  the  appointment  of  God,  conceived  in  the  womb 
of  Mary,  of  the  seed  of  David,  but  by  the  Holy 
Ghost."  ''Xow  the  virginity  of  Mary  was  hidden 
from  the  prince  of  this  world"  (Ad  Eph.  C  18. 
19.).  The  heretics  against  whom  he  wrote  did  not 
deny  the  fact,  but  explained  it  away  as  they  ex- 
plained away  our  Lord's  Passion.  It  would  have 
been  a  controversial  advantage  to  Ignatius,  if  he 
could  have  asserted  that  our  Lord  was  born  as 
other  men  are;  but  he  knew  nothing  of  any  such 
doctrine,  and  the  Churches  of  Western  Asia  Minor 
to  which  he  wrote,  were  evidently  involved  in  the 
same  ignorance. 

Even  the  Jews,  in  their  bitter  persecution  of 
the  Christians,  made  no  serious  attempt  to  show 
that  Jesus  was  the  son  of  Joseph  and  Mary.  Their 
libel  was,  that  He  was  the  son  of  a  Roman  soldier 
named  Pantheras;  and  they  called  Him,  "Ben 
Pandera,"  an  evidently  intentional  misreading  of 


54  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

the  name  in  vogue  among  the  earlj  Christians: 
"Ben  Parthena,"  the  Virgin's  son. 

W^en  Ignatins  wrote,  the  Virgin  birth  was 
already  accepted  without  question,  from  Antioch 
to  Ephesus ;  in  the  Churches  which  had  received 
the  Faith  from  St.  Paul,  and  which  were  fresh 
from  the  teaching  of  St.  John. 

At  the  election  of  Matthias,  St.  Peter  stated 
his  understanding  of  the  duty  laid  upon  him  and 
his  fellow  Apostles.  They  were  to  bear  witness  of 
the  things  they  had  seen  and  heard  since  the  Bap- 
tism of  John  (Acts  I.  21.  22).  They  confined 
themselves  to  their  personal  testimony,  that  they 
might  be  able  to  say,  "We  are  witness  of  these 
things." 

St.  Mark's  Gospel  is  said  to  be  the  substance 
of  the  preaching  of  Peter,  and  it  begins  with  the 
baptism  of  John.  It  does  not  relate  the  circum- 
stances of  the  Childhood  of  our  Lord,  for  Peter 
was  not  a  witness  of  that  portion  of  our  Lord's 
Life.  St.  John  passes  at  once  to  the  events  of  the 
Saviour's  Ministry  with  the  single  sentence,  "The 
Word  was  made  Flesh."  But  to  suppose  that 
these  Evangelists  were  ignorant  of  the  facts  re- 
lating to  our  Lord's  Childhood,  because  they  con- 
fined their  narratives  to  the  events  of  His  Ministry 
which   they  witnessed,  is    absurd.     Christians   of 


The  Creeds.  55 


the  Apostolic  age,  St.  Luke  tells  us,  were  carefully 
instructed  in  the  events  of  our  Lord's  Childhood ; 
and  he  and  St.  Matthew  have  given  us  independent 
narratives  of  the  facts  relating  to  the  Saviour's 
birth. 

St.  Matthew  relates  the  story  of  Joseph,  and, 
no  doubt,  gives  us  the  tradition  which  had  been 
handed  down  from  him  at  his  home  in  Galilee. 
The  narrative  of  St.  Luke  comes  from  the  Mother 
of  our  Lord,  a  tradition  which,  with  the  hymns  of 
Zacharias,  and  Symeon,  would  naturally  be  treas- 
ured in  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  where  Mary 
found  a  home,  and  which  for  many  years  was  pre- 
sided over  by  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord. 

We  are  reminded  that  St.  Paul  does  not  men- 
tion the  Virgin  birth,  in  his  epistles,  but  he  is 
equally  silent  on  many  other  matters  which  formed 
part  of  the  Apostolic  teaching.  The  purpose  of 
his  epistles  was  not  to  restate  the  historic  basis  of 
the  Christian  Faith,  but  to  teach  the  religion  and 
ethics  of  the  Creed. 

We  may  know  what  the  substance  of  his  teach- 
ing  was,  however,  from  the  gospel  written  by  his 
pupil  and  friend,  St.  Luke ;  and  we  can  see  how 
prominent  the  Virgin  birth  was  in  his  mind  when 
he  insists  on  the  sinlessness  of  the  Saviour,  desig- 
nates Him  "the  Man  from  heaven,"  and  speaks  of 


56  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Him  as  "made  of  a  woman,"  when  he  would  nat- 
urally have  called  Plim  the  Son  of  Joseph  if  any 
such  belief  had  ever  influenced  him. 

In  one  place,  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  Saviour 
as  of  the  seed  of  David,  but  so  also  does  Ignatius, 
in  the  same  sentence  in  which  he  declares  the  Vir- 
ginity of  the  Saviour's  Mother. 

There  is  no  evidence  whatever  that  either  St. 
Paul,  or  any  other  apostolic  writer,  had  any  doubt 
whatever  regardinp;  the  Virgin  birth  of  Jesus.  It 
was  reserved  for  Jewish  blasphemers  and  Corin- 
thian and  Ebionite  heretics  to  invent  the  libel  in 
their  vain  endeavor  to  deprave  and  destroy  the 
Faith  of  the  Catholic  Church.  It  was  a  long  and 
bitter  struggle  that  the  Church  had  to  wage  with 
the  enemies  of  the  truth,  but  the  victory  was  never 
doubtful.  The  Faith,  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints,  was  loyally  preserved  and  handed  on ;  and 
at  length  the  completed  Nicene  Sjymbol  declared 
against  every  adversary,  the  verities  of  the  Creed. 
But  the  victory  of  truth  had  its  dangers.  In  the 
stress  of  conflict,  when  earnestly  contending  for 
the  Faith,  men  seemed  to  forget  that  it  was  a 
means  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  certain  end. 

The  Creed  must  be  translated  into  a  life,  or  it 
has  failed  its  purpose.  It  is  intended  to  be  the 
mainspring  and  motive  of  action,  and  the  index  of 


The  Creeds.  57 


character,  or  it  is  not  our  Creed ;  for  a  man  must, 
in  the  nature  of  things,  live  his  real  belief.  There- 
fore St.  James  brings  this  test  to  a  man's  creed :  "I 
will  show  thee  my  faith  by  my  works,"  "for  as  the 
body  without  the  spirit  is  dead,  so  faith  without 
works  is  dead  also." 

The  purpose  of  the  Creed  was  the  perfecting 
of  the  saints ;  the  formation  of  a  generation  of 
Christ-like  men,  "till  we  all  come  in  the  unity  of 
the  Faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God, 
unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  tlie  measure  of  the 
stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ."  This  fact  was 
obscured  while  men  were  earnestly  contending  for 
the  Faith.  Having  thrown  all  their  energy  into 
one  special  branch  of  spiritual  activity,  they  were 
tempted  to  exaggerate  its  importance,  and  to  lose 
their  interest  in  other  pursuits.  It  is  always  the 
danger  of  the  specialist.  The  penalty  of  his  keen 
perception  in  his  own  department,  is  a  bat-like 
blindness,  whenever  he  looks  in  any  other  direc- 
tion. 

And  so  the  utter  absorption  in  theological 
speculation  to  which  circumstances  condemned 
many  of  the  keenest  minds  in  the  Eastern  Church, 
had  the  effect  of  obscuring  the  true  relations  be- 
tween doctrine  and  life.  Antioch  might  loyally 
contend    against    those    who    denied    our    Lord's. 


58  Fundametital  Church  Principles. 


Humanity,  it  might  be  so  thoroughly  redeemed 
from  paganism,  that  when  Julian,  the  apostate, 
restored  the  temple  of  Daphne  on  the  ruins  of  the 
church  of  St.  Babylas,  and  visited  his  gorgeous 
temple,  expecting  a  splendid  ceremonial,  and  a 
great  throng  of  worshippers,  he  found,  to  his 
astonishment,  and  dismay,  only  one  individual,  a 
poor  old  heathen  priest,  with  no  better  sacrifice 
than  a  goose,  which  the  officiating  minister  had 
provided  at  his  own  cost.  Antioch  was  a  Christ- 
ian city.  There  were  no  heathen  left.  And  An- 
tioch was  intensely  orthodox. 

But,  alas,  these  Christians  were  frivolous, 
luxurious,  and  licentious,  and  they  were  ready  at 
any  moment  to  turn  a  religious  dispute  into  a 
sanguinary  fray.  It  is  needless  to  point  out  how 
true  this  was  also  of  Constantinople,  and  of  Alex- 
andria, and  other  great  centers  of  the  Orthodox 
Christians  of  the  East.  They  were  zealous  for  the 
true  Faith,  but  they  were  as  unlike  the  Divine 
Master  as  the  heathen  themselves. 

In  their  pursuit  of  speculative  truth,  they  had 
overlooked  the  fact,  that,  except  as  a  means  to  at- 
tain a  certain  end,  doctrine  has  no  abiding  value. 
Of  what  avail  was  it,  that  their  creed  was  accurate- 
ly orthodox,  if  it  had  lost  its  power  to  touch  the 
heart,  and  to  sanctify  the  life  ? 


The  Creeds.  59 


In  sncli  a  ease  the  Faith  was  dead. 

There  was  a  great  contrast  in  the  conditions  in- 
fluencing- the  development  of  the  Church  in  East- 
ern and  Western  Europe.  In  some  respects  West- 
ern Europe  was  a  new  country.  It  possessed  only- 
one  great  city,  famous  not  only  because  of  its  size, 
its  wealth,  and  its  antiquity,  but  because  for  ages 
it  had  been  the  seat  of  power,  and  of  authority. 

The  local  church  at  Rome  inherited  from  the 
city  a  prestige  and  dignity  far  above  the  merits  of 
the  obscure  and  uninfluential  Bishoj)s  who  in  the 
first  and  second  centuries  occupied  the  Episcopal 
chair  in  the  imperial  city ;  and  the  spirit  of  pagan 
Rome  insensibly  and  inevitably  leavened  the 
Church,  and  shaped  its  policy.  It  became  Roman 
in  its  methods  and  aims,  and  when  it  was  suddenly 
called  from  danger  and  ignominy,  to  occupy  the 
seat  of  power,  with  a  vast  and  varied  scene  of  ac- 
tion opening  up  to  it,  more  than  ever  was  it  con- 
strained to  frame  itself  on  the  model  of  secular  ad- 
ministration, and  to  imitate  the  polity  and  the 
philosophy  of  the  civil  rulers  of  the  Western 
world. 

The  secular  idea  of  government  was  a  central- 
ized despotism,  and  the  Roman  mind,  with  its  gov- 
erning instinct,  and  its  tendency  to  mould  under 
one  central  authority  all  the  varied  forces  it  could 


60  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

control,  powerfullj'  influenced  the  trend  of  Christ- 
ian effort.  The  Western  Chnrch  gradually  be- 
came a  great  ecclesiastical  organization,  with  cen- 
tral unity  to  secure  practical  efficiency,  and  to  as- 
similate all  available  forces  wherever  they  might 
be  found.  It  faithfully  moulded  itself  on  the  im- 
perial model,  of  the  old  pagan  empire,  and  in  the 
course  of  time  presented  the  aspect  of  a  powerful 
machine,  moved  by  one  central  authority. 

The  system  had  its  advantages,  but  there  were 
faults  also  in  the  process  of  construction.  The 
builders  of  the  Western  Church,  intent  on  practi- 
cal efficiency,  seized  the  elements  of  their  age,  and 
combined  them  to  subserve  the  purposes  of  utility. 
They  thought  more  of  the  work  these  forces  could 
be  made  to  do,  than  of  the  quality  of  that  work. 
Puritv  of  doctrine  was  a  secondarv  consideration. 
And  the  result  they  attained  was  a  compromise 
between  truth  and  error.  Customs  and  beliefs 
were  pressed  into  service  which  could  add  energy 
to  the  Church.  If  a  superstition  had  a  stronger 
hold  on  backward  minds  than  a  true  Christian  be- 
lief, the  superstition  was  utilized.  If  a  semi- 
pagan  custom  was  dearer  to  the  heart  of  a  rude 
people  than  the  pure  worship  of  a  spiritual  age,  the 
custom  was  adopted. 


The  Creeds.  61 


And  so,  with  their  hearts  set  on  the  practical 
effectiveness  of  the  machine  they  were  building 
up,  those  Roman  organizers  framed  an  ecclesiasti- 
cal structure  in  which  much  clay  was  mingled  with 
the  iron.  Captivated  with  the  dream  of  an  im- 
perial Church,  the  counterpart  in  its  despotic 
unity  of  the  secular  empire,  they  forgot  that  this 
external  organization  was  only  valuable  as  a  means 
to  secure  a  certain  end ;  for  unity  and  energy  were 
worthless  unless  they  served  to  reproduce  in  the 
children  of  the  Church,  the  Character  and  the  Life 
of  Christ.  They  were  so  busy  in  forming  a  strong 
united  Church,  that  they  neglected  the  duty  of  im- 
parting to  the  children  of  the  Church,  the  Faith 
once  delivered  to  the  Saints,  for  the  edifying  of 
the  Body  of  Christ ;  so  that  all  might  come  in  the 
unity  of  the  Faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God,  to  a  perfect  man. 

And  at  length  the  results  were  so  pitifully 
unlike  those  which  the  Gospel  required,  that  it  be- 
came apparent  to  all  that  something  was  needed  to 
supplement  the  work  which  the  Church  was  doing. 
The  life  of  the  ordinary  mediaeval  Churchman  was 
so  unchristian,  that  it  was  felt  something  must  be 
done  to  supply  the  ideal  of  Christian  life.  It  was 
considered  hopeless  to  expect  this  from  men  living 
amid  the  circumstances  of  ordinary  life. 


62  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

To  become  real  Christians,  disciples  of 
Christ-like  character,  it  was  felt  that  men  must  be 
separated  from  the  world,  and  guarded  in  some 
quiet  retreat  where  the  \'iolence,  the  sensuality  and 
the  sordid  selfishness  of  the  world  could  not  reach 
them.  There,  in  the  inner  court  of  the  temple, 
separated  from  all  vain  and  unhallowed  associa- 
tions, it  was  thought  that  the  Christian  character, 
cleansed  by  penitence,  and  adorned  with  the  fruits 
of  the  Spirit,  might  grow  up  to  a  perfect  man. 

I  do  not  wish  to  under-estiraate  the  part 
played  by  the  monk  in  the  up-building  of  the  na- 
tions of  Western  Europe.  In  the  Providence  of 
God  he  was  of  inestimable  value,  in  those  savage 
days  when  learning,  and  art,  peace,  and  love, 
science  and  manufacture  had  scarcely  a  lodgement 
an^-where,  save  within  monastic  walls. 

When  the  world  was  filled  with  violence,  it 
was  a  good  thing  that  somewhere  the  ideal  of  the 
Christian  life  was  in  a  measure  preserved.  Law- 
less violence  and  lustful  rapacity  were  rebuked  by 
the  quiet,  peaceful  monastery,  and  savage  spirits 
were  reminded  of  an  eternal  judgment-seat,  and 
of  the  repentance  that  must  anticipate  the  meeting 
with  a  righteous  God. 

But  the  monk,  also,  bore  witness  that  the 
Church  had  failed  in  its  mission.     With  all  its 


The  Creeds.  63 


appearance  of  unity,  strength  and  efficiency,  it 
had,  in  the  very  plenitude  of  its  power,  abandoned 
the  purpose  of  its  Master,  to  be  the  conqueror  of 
the  world;  and,  despairing  of  bringing  humanity 
to  His  feet,  had  retreated  within  monastic  walls, 
as  the  only  refuge,  where  it  might  be  hoped  the 
prince  of  this  world  would  not  prevail.  If  to 
save  themselves  from  corruption,  the  more  spiritu- 
allv  minded  members  of  the  Church  must  with- 
draw  from  the  rest,  how  hopelessly  degraded  and 
secular  would  not  the  residue  become,  and  how 
complete  a  reversal  was  this  of  the  parable  of  the 
gospel,  which  compared  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to 
leaven,  abiding  in  the  midst  of  the  unquickened 
mass  until  all  was  leavened ! 

It  was  found,  also,  that  the  monastic  cell  was 
by  no  means  free  from  the  assault  of  temptation. 
A  life  of  formal  restraint  was  not  the  equivalent 
of  a  life  of  free  service,  and  when  in  the  round  of 
daily  duty  the  redemption  of  the  degraded  and  sin- 
ful found  no  place,  save  through  alms  or  interces- 
sions, good  men  were  apt  to  grow  selfish  in  feeling, 
mechanical  in  devotion,  and  self-indulgent  in 
practice. 

Along  side  of  the  corruptions  of  the  world, 
there  arose  the  corruption  of  the  monastery,  de- 
manding   with  equal  urgency    the    most    radical 


64  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

reformation.  If  the  theological  speculation  of  the 
East,  in  it8  anxiety  to  repeat  an  accurately  ortho- 
dox creed  had  failed  to  fulfil  the  purpose  for  which 
the  Faith  was  delivered  to  the  Saints,  the  policy  of 
the  West  to  subordinate  other  considerations  for 
the  sake  of  securing  outward  unity,  and  energetic 
efficiency  in  organization,  had  been  equally  unsuc- 
cessful. Both  were  useful  as  means  to  an  end,  but 
both  had  forgotten  the  purpose  of  the  Master  of 
the  Church,  in  their  earnest  attention  to  the  means. 

When  the  light  of  more  peaceful  days  began 
to  break  in,  on  the  darkness  of  those  ages  of  yio- 
lence,  in  which  the  nations  of  Europe  Avere  strug- 
gling upward,  to  some  realization  of  law  and  lib- 
erty, many  earnest  souls  could  be  observed,  strain- 
ing  their  vision  to  discern  a  more  excellent  way,  by 
which  the  children  of  men  could  be  brought  to  the 
feet  of  the  Saviour. 

They  felt  that  religion  was  more  thkn  the  ver- 
bal confession  of  an  orthodox  faith,  that  it  was 
more  than  a  mere  matter  of  organization,  that  it 
was  more  than  collective  acts  of  piety,  more  than 
an  attendance  on  religious  functions,  and  comply- 
ing with  specified  religious  rules.  They  were  con- 
vinced that  religion  was  a  personal  matter,  and 
that  its  essence  consisted,  not  in  external  acts,  but 
in  a  purified  state  of  the  affections,  constituting  a 


The  Creeds. 


mystical  union  between  the  Spirit  of  Christ  and 
the  soul.  They  attached  great  importance  to  the 
act  of  faith,  by  which  the  individual  soul  was  sup- 
posed to  connect  itself  with  Christ,  and  enter  into 
a  heavenly  life  which  they  called  conversion. 

It  was  a  salutary  thing  to  call  attention  to  the 
personal  element  in  religion.  The  individualism 
which  the  reformers  preached,  reminded  men  that 
the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  was  for  the  whole 
world,  and  not  for  a  favored  few,  who  had  sep- 
arated themselves,  and  retired  to  the  cloisters ;  it 
proclaimed  that  for  the  men  digging  in  the  field, 
or  serving  in  the  shops,  there  was  the  same  calling 
to  a  life  of  conscious  communion  with  God,  that 
the  monk  was  supposed  to  enjoy ! 

The  field  was  the  world,  and  everywhere  the 
Prince  of  Peace  asked  for  worship,  service  and 
obedience.  The  danger  of  the  reformer  was  his 
tendency  to  substitute  feeling  for  fact,  and  to 
guage  the  strength  and  purity  of  his  faith  by  the 
intensity  of  his  emotions.  Absorbed  in  seeking 
mystical  communion  with  Christ,  or  in  describing 
the  blessedness  of  personal  intercourse  with  Him, 
he  was  disposed  to  undervalue  the  active  life  of 
Christian  self-denial,  and  service.  And  of  what 
value  was  emotional  exaltation  of  the  spirit,  unless 
it  served  as  a  motive  power,  constraining  a  man  to 


66  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

be  like  Christ,  in  conduct,  and  in  action,  and  lead- 
ing him  in  everyday  duty  to  imitate  His  example  ? 

In  mediaeval  Christianity  there  was  a  ten- 
dency to  divide  the  Church  into  classes,  the 
religious,  and  the  secular,  and  among  the  reform- 
ers there  was  a  tendency  to  reproduce  that  separa- 
tion in  the  individual  life.  Life,  with  them, 
had  its  Sunday  aspect,  and  its  week-day  appear- 
ance, its  religious  side  and  its  secular  side.  The 
same  man  would  be  fervently  pious,  and  intensely 
worldly,  fanatically  religious,  and  yet  practically 
immoral.  The  religious  life  was  confined  to  the 
place  of  prayer  and  seemed  to  exercise  little  in- 
fluence over  the  relations  of  ordinary  life. 

The  man  who  in  his  religious  life  was  fervent 
and  sincere,  might  yet  be  harsh,  unlovable,  and 
even  dishonest  in  his  secular  life.  He  might  re- 
joice in  the  intensity  of  his  religious  feeling,  and 
vet  he  Avas  no  true  Christian,  he  was  not  like 
Christ. 

It  is  our  duty,  and  our  privilege,  to  profit  by 
the  errors  of  the  past,  and  to  heed  the  warnings 
that  the  teaching  of  experience  sounds  in  our  ears. 
We  are  conscious  of  the  imperfections  of  those 
different  forms  of  Christian  activity,  the  theologi- 
cal speculation  of  the  Eastern  Church,  the  desire 
in  the  Western  Church  to  imitate  the  methods  of 


The  Creeds.  67 


secular  empire,  in  outward  organization,  and  the 
religious  emotionalism  of  a  subsequent  age,  and  we 
can  see  the  cause  of  their  failure  to  accomplish  the 
purpose  for  which  the  Church  exists. 

In  each  case  the  failure  was  caused  by  forget- 
f ulness  of  the  purpose  of  the  means  of  grace,  and  a 
substitution  of  the  means  for  the  end,  which 
alone  gives  them  value.  We  have  awakened  to 
some  realization  of  the  fact  that  the  Faith  is  dead 
unless  it  does  its  work,  by  making  men  like  Christ, 
in  thought,  in  feeling,  in  character,  and  in  action. 

Testimony  is  reaching  us  from  many  quar- 
ters, from  widening  streams  of  thought,  from  en- 
larged ideas  of  charity,  from  the  pressure  of  social 
and  economic  problems,  from  the  complex  neces- 
sities of  human  life,  that  the  Christian  counsels  of 
perfection,  are  after  all  practical  counsels,  and 
that,  whatever  may  be  the  remonstrances  of  world- 
ly wisdom,  and  the  protests  of  human  selfishness, 
the  true  code  of  ethics  is  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
and  the  model  of  action  the  example  of  Jesus 
Christ. 

]^o  doubt,  there  are  many,  who,  like  the 
Churchmen  of  the  middle  ages  despair  of  repro- 
ducing the  Mind  of  Christ  in  this  evil  generation ; 
and  ages  of  effort  may  be  required  before  the  ex- 
ample of  our  Saviour  will  be  freely  exemplified 


68  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


among  men ;  but,  nevertheless,  it  is  true  that  the 
Faith  can  only  edify  the  Saints  in  proportion  as  it 
brings  them  into  conformity  with  the  image  of 
Christ. 

The  world  is  apprehending  this  truth.  It 
is  conscious  that  it  is  the  dutv  of  the  Church 
to  make  men  like  unto  Christ.  That  is  the 
meaning  of  the  taunt  of  the  scorner  who  pro- 
nounces Christianity  a  failure.  That  is  the  real 
significance  of  the  defiance  of  the  infidel.  That  is 
the  explanation  of  the  indifference  of  multitudes 
who  should  be  strenuous  supporters  of  the  Faith. 
That  is  the  interpretation  of  many  a  strange  social 
and  ethical  movement  fermenting  in  the  midst  of 
modern  society. 

They  all  are  bearing  witness  to  the  character 
of  Jesus  the  Christ.  They  may  be,  and  probably 
are,  blind  to  the  significance  of  their  own  testi- 
mony; but  one  by  one  they  testify  to  the  true 
Light  that  lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the 
world.  They  recognize  that  the  vocation  of  the 
Church,  is  to  reproduce  the  Life  of  Jesus  Christ  in 
the  world,  and  to  lead  men  to  know  that  Life,  and 
to  love  it,  and  copy  it. 

So  far  as  it  falls  short  of  this,  the  Church 
fails  to  accomplish  its  mission.  For  this  purpose 
the  Faith  exists.     And    the  apprehension    of   the 


The  Creeds.  69 


dogmatic  truths  of  the  Creed ;  or  the  marshalling 
of  the  spiritual  forces  of  the  Church  in  effective 
organization,  or  the  mystic  communion  of  the 
Spirit  with  the  Christ  that  we  confess  in  the  Creed, 
are  nothing  else  than  means  to  attain  this  end ;  and, 
so  far  as  they  fail  of  their  appointed  purpose  and 
fruition,  so  far  are  they  like  the  body  from  which 
the  spirit  has  departed.  The  hostile  voices  that 
we  hear,  have  been  raised  because  the  Church  has 
failed  in  its  purpose.  We  may  be  thankful  that 
it  has  awakened  to  a  sense  of  its  true  vocation. 
For  now  it  seems  to  see  with  undimmed  vision  that 
the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  should  be  the  rule  of  the 
disciple's  life. 

But,  like  the  Christians  of  other  ages,  we 
have  our  dangers  which  threaten  to  bring  to  naught 
the  work  our  Lord  has  committed  into  our  hands. 
Seeing  the  end  plainly,  we  are  prone  to  be  impa- 
tient of  the  conditions  of  success  in  attaining  to  it. 
At  one  time  men  exhausted  their  energy  so  com- 
pletely in  defining  the  Faith,  that  they  seemed  too 
feeble  to  follow  definition  by  practice.  And  now 
we  would  overlook  the  means,  or  impatiently 
thrust  it  aside,  and  attain  at  once  to  the  end,  for- 
getting that  there  is  a  ladder  let  do^vn  from  heaven 
to  earth,  and  that  the  way  upward  must  be  tra- 
versed step  by  step  before  we  can  sit  down  in 
heavenly  places. 


70  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

During  the  present  century  it  has  not  unfre- 
quently  been  assumed  that  Christian  liberty, 
equality,  and  fraternity  would  pervade  every 
heart,  and  adorn  everv  life  in  a  communitv,  if  a 
group  of  people  would  only  meet  together  and  vote 
to  follow  this  rule.  But  efforts  to  realize  this 
ideal  have  been  hopelessly  disappointing.  The 
necessary  preliminary  means  had  not  been  used  to 
attain  the  desired  end.  The  ground  had  not  beeu 
cultivated,  the  seed  had  not  been  sown,  .and  yet  a 
harvest  was  expected. 

In  vain  will  we  gather  together  a  community 
of  men  who  have  resolved  to  form  a  Christian 
republic  of  love,  unless  we  first  endow  these  men 
with  the  spiritual  qualifications  which  will  make 
liberty  safe,  equality  orderly,  and  fraternity  just. 
And  these  qualities  are  not  made  to  order.  It  is 
a  slow  process  to  create  them  and  bring  them  to 
maturity.  Before  they  can  become  the  basis  of 
practical  endeavor,  a  generation  which  has  im- 
bibed the  evangelical  spirit  must  bequeath  its  de- 
velopment to  others,  and  these  generations  must  en- 
large and  intensify  this  spirit  until  it  becomes  the 
ethos  of  the  race,  and  thus  the  ground  may  be  pre- 
pared where  the  ideal  of  a  Christian  community 

can  flourish. 

Of  what  avail  is  law  without  public  sentiment 
behind  it  ?   The  law  regarding  murder  is  the  same 


The  Creeds.  71 


in  two  communities.  But  in  one  the  murderer  is 
promptly  hanged,  and  in  the  other  his  life  is  rea- 
sonably safe  unless  he  is  lynched.  So  powerless 
is  law  without  public  opinion  behind  it. 

Only  after  long  ages  of  faithful  preaching  of 
the  Word  of  God  did  the  Church  so  impress  on  our 
race  the  law  of  liberty,  that  personal  freedom, 
righteousness,  and  justice  have  become  a  passion 
among  the  English-speaking  people.  Contrast 
that  love  of  liberty,  and  that  scornful  hatred  of 
injustice,  with  the  ideas  pervading  the  great 
French  nation,  as  exemplified  in  a  famous  case 
now  agitating  that  whole  people,  but  with  no  cer- 
tainty whatever  that  even  the  tardiest  justice  will 
be  meted  out  to  the  victim  of  evident  conspiracy 
and  forgery.  What  a  conception  this  tragic  event 
gives  us  of  the  debt  we  owe  as  a  people  to  the 
Church ! 

If,  in  the  long  ages  of  its  stewardship,  the 
Galilean  Church  had  given  to  the  people  the  Word 
of  God  "in  the  language  understood  by  them"  with 
that  unwearied  faithfulness,  with  which  the 
Church  has  given  to  us  the  English  Bible;  free- 
dom, and  right,  and  law  would  be  as  precious  there 
as  they  are  with  us.  The  first  step  in  progress, 
therefore,  is  the  formation  of  a  character  that  can 
bear  improvement,  and  it  is  a  fatal  mistake  to  think 


72  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

we  can  dispense  with  the  means,  by  which  alone 
that  character  can  be  formed.  Behind  the  realm 
of  things  visible  is  another  kingdom,  the  domain  of 
spirit.  In  the  spirit  is  the  seat  of  the  habitual 
thoughts,  and  impulses  and  desires,  and  only 
Spirit  can  contend  with  spirit  and  overcome  it.  It 
alone  can  enter  into  that  realm  of  the  invisible, 
and  meet  and  subdue  that  intangible  but  most 
potent  energy,  the  spirit  or  character. 

For  this  purpose  the  Son  of  God  was  mani- 
fested. For  this  purpose  He  has  promised  His 
Spirit,  to  convince  the  world  of  sin,  and  of  right- 
eousness, and  of  judgment.  And  only  when  that 
conquest  is  achieved,  can  the  formative  work  fol- 
low, the  edifying  of  the  saint,  till  he  comes  in  the 
unity  of  the  Faith  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son 
of  God  to  a  perfect  man. 

My  brethren,  we  are  ministers  of  the  Church 
and  we  must  settle  firmly  in  our  minds  what  it  is 
we  are  depending  on,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry. 

What  is  the  power  behind  us  ?  On  what  does 
the  Church  depend  for  its  victories  ?  Is  it  simply 
a  certain  temper,  and  character  transmitted  from 
one  generation  of  believers  to  another  ?  Can  we 
speak  of  the  spirit  of  the  Church,  as  we  would  of 
the  spirit  of  a  race  ?  If  so,  then  it  is  only  a  human 
thing  subject  to  the  laws  of  decay.     It  may  be  a 


The  Creeds.  73 


formidable  force,  like  the  spirit  of  the  Saracen,  or 
of  the  pagan  Roman ;  its  reign  may  be  long,  but 
its  doom  is  sure. 

If  the  spirit  of  the  Church  is  only  the  consis- 
tent purpose  of  a  body  of  men  who  have  caught  the 
enthusiasm  of  a  great  prophet,  and  have  embodied 
the  principles  of  his  teaching  in  their  thought  and 
life,  then  we  may  be  sure  the  triumphant  anticipa- 
tions of  the  Xew  Testament  will  never  be  realized, 
and  the  prophecy  of  the  Saviour,  that  He  would 
draw  all  men  unto  Him,  will  come  to  naught. 
For  if  the  Spirit,  that  power  which  moves  the 
Church,  is  only  a  human  thing,  subject  to  waste 
and  decay,  the  fate  of  the  old  faiths  of  the  past 
will  be  the  fate  of  the  religion  of  Jesus. 

But  the  Founder  of  the  Church  was  not  mere- 
ly the  greatest  Man  that  ever  lived,  who  has  com- 
municated His  character  and  aspirations  to  His 
folloAvers,  He  is  God  made  manifest  in  the  Flesh, 
and  His  Spirit  is  not  a  mere  influence  or  energy, 
but  a  Living  Person.  If  the  Spirit  of  Christ  had 
only  been  an  influence,  or  impulse,  caught  from 
Him,  how  absurd  would  be  His  saying :  "It  is  ex- 
pedient for  you  that  I  go  away,  for  if  I  go  not 
away  the  Spirit  will  not  come  to  you ;"  for,  in  that 
case,  how  could  it  be  better  that  the  personal 
source  of  this  influence  should  be  removed  ?    But 


74  Fiindawental  Church  Principles. 

when  with  the  Apostles  we  comprehend  that  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  is  a  Living  Person,  moving  over 
the  darkness  of  the  sonl  and  infusing  the  Light 
and  the  Life  of  Christ,  and  for  this  purpose 
abiding  in  the  Church  from  generation  to  genera- 
tion, then  are  we  certain  that  the  power  behind  our 
ministry,  the  Spirit  of  the  Church,  the  weapon  of 
our  warfare,  will  forevermore  be  found  mighty  to 
the  pulling  down  of  strongholds. 

In  our  eagerness  to  make  men  like  Christ,  we 
must  not  forget  that  the  result  can  only  be  pro- 
duced by  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  is  the  secret  Power 
which  has  won  all  the  notable  victories  of  the 
Church  in  its  long  warfare  with  the  world.  To 
Him  is  due  those  successive  victories  of  love,  the 
abolition  of  slavery,  the  elevation  of  woman,  the 
modification  of  the  ferocity  of  war,  the  recognition 
of  human  rights,  the  supremacy  of  law,  the  service 
of  the  sick,  the  outcast,  the  feeble,  and  the  poor, 
and  He  is  the  abundant  justification  of  the  opti- 
mistic hope  that  there  shall  be  a  restitution  of  all 
things,  and  that  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  shall 
become  the  kingdoms  of  God  and  of  His  Christ. 

We  know  that  the  Spirit  of  the  Church  is  a 
Divine  Person,  and  that  the  loving  Will  of  our 
Redeemer  is  Omnipotent.  Whatever  may  be  the 
aspect  of  the  world,  however  hostile  its  intellect, 


The  Creeds.  75 


however  antagonistic  its  ambitions,  and  lusts,  the 
vision  of  a  redeemed  world  will  surely  come.  The 
future  does  not  belong  to  the  power  of  wealth,  vast 
as  its  resources  may  be,  nor  to  the  rulers  who  com- 
mand the  armaments  that  seem  to  rule  the  earth 
and  the  sea;  it  belongs  to  an  unseen  Spiritual 
Power,  and  the  heir  of  the  ages  is  He  who  sends 
that  Power  on  its  mission,  the  meek  and  lowly 
Jesus. 

Since  He  set  up  His  throne  on  Calvary,  and 
reigned  from  the  tree,  great  empires  have  come 
and  gone;  the  Roman,  the  Turk,  and  the  Span- 
iard, in  succession,  have  dominated  the  world,  and 
after  a  little  space,  their  day  has  set  in  darkness. 
But  through  all  these  mutations  of  the  kingdoms  of 
this  world,  the  Church  of  Christ  has  grown  and 
strengthened,  until  it  has  taken  as  its  possession 
the  utmost  parts  of  the  earth.  "Not  by  might, 
nor  by  power,  but  by  My  Spirit,  saith  the  Lord  of 
Hosts."  The  only  power  that  can  bring  about 
the  great  change  in  life  and  character,  and  renew 
men  in  the  spirit  of  their  mind,  and  lead  them  to 
put  on  the  new  man  which,  after  God,  is  created  in 
righteousness  and  true  holiness  is  the  Holy  Ghost. 

In  seeking  the  end  for  which  the  Church 
exists,  the  formation  of  a  generation  of  Christ-like 
men,  whom  the  King  will  not  be  ashamed  to  call 


76  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


His  brethren,  let  us  not  forget  thfe  means  by  which 
the  result  alone  can  be  attained.  The  transforma- 
tion is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  His 
method,  we  are  told,  is  to  take  of  the  things  of 
Christ  and  show  them  unto  us;  He  is  the  great 
Teacher  who  can  bring  us  one  by  one  in  the  unity 
of  the  Faith  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of 
God  to  a  perfect  Man.  "He  shall  teach  you  all 
things." 

The  Creed  sums  up  this  teaching.  Its  author 
is  the  Holy  Spirit.  Like  Him  it  changes  not ;  it 
is  the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints.  "Who- 
soever will  be  saved,  before  all  things  it  is  neces- 
sary that  he  hold  the  Catholic  Faith."  He  must 
listen  to  the  Divine  Teacher  who  alone  can  make 
him  wise  unto  salvation  ;  he  must  submit  his  mind 
to  receive  truths  that  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear 
heard,  and  which  have  not  entered  into  the  heart 
of  man ;  but  which  God  hath  revealed  unto  us  by 
His  Spirit;  for  the  Spirit  searcheth  all  things, 
yea,  the  deep  things  of  God. 

Hence,  my  brethren,  in  our  life  and  in  our 
ministry,  we  must  with  devout  steadfastness  hold 
the  Creeds  of  the  Church  in  their  fulness. 

Every  assault  against  the  verities  of  the  Cath- 
olic Faith,  veiled  though  it  be  behind  the  apology 
of  seeking  to  accommodate  the  Faith  to  the  needs 


The  Creeds.  77 


of  a  modern  world,  or  justified  by  the  assertion 
that  the  assailant  is  seeking  after  truth,  and  must 
be  fearless  in  his  investigations,  or  excused  be- 
cause the  individual  is  impatient  of  creeds  and 
dogmas,  and  pleads  that  they  fetter  his  spirit,  and 
prevent  the  free  and  willing  service  his  soul  longs 
to  offer  to  the  Saviour;  every  assault,  I  say,  sets 
back  in  some  degree  the  victory  of  Jesus  over  the 
world ;  for  it  is  a  resistance  of  the  Spirit  who 
takes  of  the  things  of  Christ,  and,  in  the  Creed, 
shows  them  unto  us. 

While  holding  fast  the  truth,  that  the  purpose 
for  which  the  Church  was  created,  and  for  which 
the  Faith  was  delivered  to  it,  is  to  make  men 
Christ-like,  and  that,  no  matter  how  earnest  for  an 
orthodox  faith  the  Church  may  be,  no  matter  how 
complete  and  efficient  in  organization,  no  matter 
how  eager  to  realize  an  exalted  spiritual  condition, 
it  has  failed  in  its  purpose  if  it  is  not  making  men 
Christ-like,  we  must  hold  with  equal  tenacity  the 
complementary  truth,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  alone 
can  produce  this  result,  and  that  His  method  is  to 
take  of  the  things  of  Christ,  and  show  them  unto 
us.  It  is  His  testimony  we  repeat  when  we  stand 
and  say,  "I  believe."  It  is  to  Him  the  Christian 
owes  the  solemn  confession,  "I  know  in  whom  I 
have  believed." 


78  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


Our  religion  is  supernatural.     The  Gospel  of 
Jesus  Christ  is  not  the  history  of  a  remarkable 
man  of  blameless  life.      It  is  the  proclamation  of 
the  love  of    God  for  perishing  sinners,  to  save 
whom  He  sent  His  Only-begotten  Son,  that  whoso- 
ever believeth  on  Him  might  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life.     It  proclaims  that  for  us  men  and 
our  salvation.  He  who  counted  it  no  prize  to  be  on 
an  equality  with  God,  emptied  Himself,  taking  the 
form  of  a  servant,  and  was  made  Man,  and  became 
obedient  unto  death.     It  declares  that  through  His 
Blood  we  have  redemption,  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 
It  solemnlv  warns  us  that  God  conmiands  all  men 
everywhere  to  repent,  because  He  "hath  appointed 
a  day,  in  which  He  will  judge  the  world  in  right- 
eousness, by  that  Man  whom  He  hath  ordained, 
whereof  He  hath  given  assurance  unto  all  men,  in 
that  He  hath  raised  Him  from  the  dead."     It 
declares  the  glorious  purpose  of  God  in  exalting 
His  only  Son  Jesus  Christ    to  be    a  Prince    and 
Saviour,  and  in  conferring  on  Him  all  power,  both 
in    heaven    and    in    earth.     It    reveals    that    our 
Saviour  is  the  heir  of  all  things,  the  Conqueror 
who  will  subdue  all  things  unto  Himself,  so  that  to 
Him  every  knee  shall  bow,  and  every  tongue  con- 
fess that  He  is  Lord. 


The  Creeds.  79 


This  mighty  conquest  is  "not  by  might  nor  by 
power"  (although  the  Christ  is  omnipotent),  "but 
by  My  Sjiirit,  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts." 

The  pressure  compelling  the  conquered  to  bow 
the  knee  and  to  confess  that  Christ  is  Lord,  is  the 
constraint  of  the  Spirit  of  Love.  It  was  to 
accomplish  this  Mighty  Conquest  that  the  risen 
Lord  formed  His  Church,  and  endowed  it  with  a 
commission  to  run  to  the  end  of  time ;  and  placed 
within  it  the  abiding  Presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  Lord,  and  Giver  of  Life,  and  sent  it  forth  to 
accomplish  its  mission.  Our  Creed  is  the  solemn 
confession,  taught  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  of  that  un- 
dying truth,  by  which  the  Church  in  its  corporate 
capacity,  and  we,  as  its  individual  members,  must 
live,  and  work,  and  grow  in  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God  towards  perfection. 

No  portion  of  the  Spirit's  testimony  can  we 
surrender.  Nay,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  for 
the  edifying  of  the  Body  of  Christ,  that  we  may  all 
come  in  the  unity  of  the  Faith,  and  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  Son  of  God  to  a  perfect  man,  to  the 
measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ,  we 
need  the  whole  creed  confessed  by  the  intellect, 
apprehended  by  the  heart,  and  translated  into  a 
life  of  service  and  of  sacrifice,  which,  however 
imperfectly,  will  reflect  the  Mind  of  Christ. 


80  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

In  conclusion,  mj  brethren,  we  will  not  for- 
get how  wide  is  the  difference  in  the  capacity  of 
men.  Having  gifts  differing  one  from  another, 
there  will  always  be  occasion  for  charity  in  our 
judgment  of  other  men ;  and  this  attitude  becomes 
those  who  are  warned  not  to  think  of  themselves 
more  highly  than  they  ought  to  think,  but,  to  think 
soberly. 

Remember  always  that  your  brethren  may  be 
as  loyal  to  the  Faith  as  yourself,  although  they 
look  at  it  from  another  point  of  view.  The  Faith 
is  larger  than  the  capacity  of  the  human  mind. 
And  we  are  one-sided,  as  well  as  finite.  We 
do  not  prophesy  according  to  the  proportion  of  the 
Faith. 

When  we  recite  the  Creed,  we  do  not  all  put 
the  emphasis  in  the  same  place.  The  doctrine  of 
Holy  Baptism,  or  the  Doctrine  of  the  Sacramental 
Grace  of  the  Holy  Communion,  or  the  Doctrine  of 
the  Fatherhood  of  God,  or  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  Comforter,  may  be  most  in  the 
thought  of  a  disciple,  or  one  man  may  adore  Christ 
crucified,  while  another  rejoices  in  Him  as  the 
King  with  many  crowns.  And  yet  they  all  hold 
the  Faith  in  a  pure  conscience. 

One  type  of  Christian  character,  dwelling  on 
the  truth  that  God  is  a  Spirit,  and  they  who  wor- 


The  Creeds.  81 


ship  Him  must  worship  Him  in  spirit,  may  see 
only  a  form  of  unbelief  in  the  temper  which  finds 
its  highest  spiritual  uplift  in  the  adoration  of  our 
Lord's  presence  in  the  Sacrament  under  the  veils 
of  bread  and  wine — it  may  seem  that  this  craving 
after  something  material  and  tangible  in  worship, 
is  really  the  faithlessness  which  refuses  to  worship 
God  in  spirit. 

And,  on  the  other  hand,  the  disciple  whose 
highest  privilege  is  sacramental  worship,  may  see 
in  the  attitude  of  his  brother  the  faithlessness  that 
does  not  discern  our  Lord's  Body. 

But  in  reality  both  are  loyal  in  their  full 
acceptance  of  the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints;  but,  as  they  have  received  gifts  differing 
one  from  another,  these  qualifications  for  service 
necessarily  cause  them  to  behold  the  vision  of  the 
City  of  God  from  different  points  of  view,  and 
affect  the  nature  of  the  service  they  render,  and  the 
confession  of  the  true  Faith  to  which  they  all  loy- 
ally bear  witness. 

But  if  we  will  keep  before  our  eyes  continu- 
ally the  end  for  which  the  Church  exists,  viz,  to 
make  men  like  Christ,  and  that  our  confession  of 
the  Faith  has  been  true  and  vital  in  proportion  as 
it  has  formed  the  reflection  of  Christ's  image  in 
our  character  and  habits,  it  will  help  us  to  think  of 


82  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

ourselves  as  we  ought  to  think ;  and  it  will  help  us 
to  a  wide  charity  in  judging  our  brethren  in  the 
Church  who  differ  from  us  in  their  apprehension 
of  the  proportion  of  the  Faith ;  because  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  our  need  of  charity  when  judgment 
is  passed  on  the  meagre  and  imperfect  service  that 
we  have  been  able  to  render. 

Let  us  never  forget  that  the  confession  of  the 
Faith  is  a  privilege.  The  last  sign  of  the  aban- 
doned, St.  Paul  tells  us,  is  that  they  are  reprobate 
concerning  the  Faith. 

The  most  terrible  of  judgments  that  came  on 
the  dark  heathen  world,  when  it  abused  the  light  of 
natural  religion,  was  that  God  gave  them  over  to 
a  reprobate  mind. 

The  Faith  is  not  man's  invention,  it  is  God's 
gift,  committed  to  the  Church  which  He  has  com- 
missioned and  endowed  to  be  the  keeper  and  wit- 
ness of  the  truth. 

It  speaks  with  the  voice  of  Divine  Wisdom, 
when  it  teaches  us  the  Faith,  and  we  must  will  to 
believe  the  truth  which  the  Church  delivers. 

There  may  be  mysteries  which  our  feeble  un- 
derstanding cannot  adequately  grasp ;  depths  in 
the  Infinite  opened  up  to  us  that  our  vision  cannot 
penetrate,  and  we  may  often  need  to  repeat  the 
disciples'  prayer,  ''Lord,  increase  our  faith." 


The  Creeds.  83 


But,  using  faithfully  the  means  of  grace 
given  us,  and  striving  to  realize  in  a  life  of  active 
self-denial,  and  service,  the  end  for  which  the 
Faith  is  given,  the  clear  vision  of  faith  will  at  last 
be  ours.  "If  any  man  will  do  His  will,  he  shall 
know  the  doctrine." 

Sacraments,  and  Creeds,  Holy  Scripture 
itself,  and  whatever  other  gifts  the  Redeemer  hath 
given  to  men,  have  but  one  purpose ;  they  are  for 
the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the  Body  of  Christ. 
They  are  the  means  of  grace..  Through  their  ap- 
pointed use,  not  otherwise,  have  we  any  reason  to 
hope  that  we  will  attain  this  end. 

And  your  defense  of  the  Creed,  your  clear 
intellectual  apprehension  of  its  verities,  your 
reverence  for  the  Sacraments,  and  frequent  use  of 
them,  your  loyalty  to  the  Church,  your  erudition 
in  Holy  Scripture  are  as  nothing,  unless  this  result 
is  steadily  being  attained ;  the  approximation  in 
the  unity  of  the  faith  and  in  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God  to  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure  of 
the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ. 


111. 
Cbe  Sacred  minsltry. 

"No  man  taketh  this  honor  unto  hiinself,  but  he  that  is  cal- 
led of  God,  as  uKis  Aaron."     Hebrews  v.  4. 

CUE  Sacred  Ministry  is  a  subject  that  comes  home 
to  us  very  closely.  We  have  been  called,  or 
are  about  to  be  called,  to  a  lioly  office.  What  does 
our  Church  tell  us  with  regard  to  its  Ministry  ?  It 
lays  down  as  one  of  its  fundamental  principles  that 
its  Ministry  is  of  Divine  origin ;  that  it  holds  its 
commission,  and  authority  from  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  by  uninterrupted  succession  from 
the  Apostles  its  Bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  have 
received  the  Office,  and  administration  to  which 
they  have  been  called. 

In  the  XXVI.  Article  of  Religion  the  Church 
declares  "that  its  Ministers  of  the  Word,  and  Sac- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  85 


raments,  act  not  in  their  OAvn  name,  but  in  Christ's, 
and  do  minister  by  His  commission  and  au- 
thority." In  the  XXIII.  Article  of  Religion  it 
forbids  anyone  to  take  on  him  the  office  of  public 
preaching,  or  ministering  of  the  Sacraments,  be- 
fore he  be  lawfully  called,  and  sent,  to  execute  the 
same.  And  it  adds,  that  those  persons  are  law- 
fully called,  and  sent,  who  have  been  chosen  and 
called  to  the  work  of  the  Ministry  by  those  to 
whom  public  authority  has  been  given,  in  the 
Church,  to  call  and  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's 
vineyard. 

In  the  preface  to  the  Ordinal  it  appeals  to 
Holy  Scripture,  and  to  history. 

''It  is  evident,"  it  says,  "unto  all  men,  dilig- 
ently reading  Holy  Scripture,  and  ancient  authors, 
that  from  the  Apostles'  time  there  have  been  these 
orders  of  ministers  in  Christ's  Church:  Bishops, 
Priests,  and  Deacons."  It  goes  on  to  say  that  no 
man  Avas  permitted  to  execute  any  of  those  offices, 
who  had  not  been  tested  as  to  his  qualifications  for 
the  Ministry,  and  then  ordained  with  imposition 
of  hands,  by  lawful  authority.  It  forbids  men  to 
execute  any  of  the  functions  of  a  Bishop,  priest, 
or  deacon,  who  has  not  had  Episcopal  Consecra- 
tion, or  Ordination. 

It  seems  unnecessary  to  add  to  this  testimony 


86  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

by  quoting  the  language  of  Ember  Collects,  and 
of  the  various  Offices  of  the  Prayer  Book  to  indi- 
cate the  mind  of  the  Church  regarding  the  Sacred 
Ministry.  In  considering  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  the  Church,  we  must  be  guided  by  the 
voice  of  the  Church  alone.  Where  it  speaks  to  us, 
through  its  authorized  formularies  in  the  Prayer 
Book,  or  through  its  Articles  of  Religion,  or 
through  its  canonical  legislation,  we  may  be  sure 
we  are  listening  to  the  voice  of  the  Church. 

This  is  a  very  different  thing  from  the  private 
opinions  or  practices  of  its  servants.  Its  minis- 
ters may  often  be  unfaithful ;  they  may  betray  the 
trust  committed  to  them,  but  their  disobedience 
does  not  invalidate  the  testimony  of  the  Church. 

We  know,  for  example,  the  mind  of  the  Church 
regarding  marriage.  It  is  plainly  set  forth,  in  the 
Marriage  Service,  and  canonical  enactments  have 
declared  the  re-marriage  of  divorced  persons, 
saving  the  innocent  person,  wliere  the  divorce 
is  granted  for  adultery,  unlawful.  But  a  clergy- 
man might,  and  I  fear  sometimes  does,  marry 
such  persons  and  admit  such  persons  to  the 
sacraments.  But  the  act  of  the  unfaithful  serv- 
ant, be  he  Bishop,  priest,  or  deacon,  does  not 
change  the  mind  of  the  Church  regarding  the  law 
of  Marriage. 


The  Sacred  Ministrij.  87 

So,  also,  the  individual  opinion  of  any  Chnrch- 
man,  or  any  lax  custom,  that  may  have  obtained 
in  any  period  of  the  Church's  history,  does  not 
alter  its  mind  regarding  the  Sacred  Ministry. 

It  plainly  declares  that  its  Ministry  holds  a 
Divine  commission,  that  it  speaks  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  and  with  His  authority  and  credentials. 
It  declares  that  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  the 
Ministry  has  consisted  of  the  three  Orders,  Bish- 
ops, Priests,  and  Deacons ;  ordained  always  with 
imposition  of  hands,  by  those  having  authority  in 
the  Church  to  call  men  to  labor  in  the  vineyard  of 
the  Lord.  And  it  adds  that  "no  man  shall  be 
taken  or  accounted  a  lawful  Bishop,  priest,  or 
deacon  of  this  Church,  or  suffered  to  execute  any 
of  the  said  functions,  except  he  hath  had  Epis- 
copal Consecration  or  Ordination." 

The  fundamental  principle  of  the  Christian 
Ministry  is  that  it  is  derived  from  our  Blessed 
Lord  Himself,  from  whom  it  is  perpetuated  by 
Episcopal  Ordination.  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
having  overcome  death,  and  him  that  hath  the 
power  of  death,  has  received  all  power  in  heaven 
and  on  earth.  He  is  the  King  of  kings,  and  in 
Him  are  all  the  gifts  and  graces  needful  for  the 
up-building  of  His  Church.  He  is  the  true  Vine, 
and  has  everv  office  of  salvation  in  Himself. 


88  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

He  is  the  one  Apostle  or  Messenger  of  His 
Father.  He  is  the  High  Priest  of  our  profession, 
the  Bishop  and  Shepherd  of  our  souls,  and  the  one 
true  Deacon,  who  came,  not  to  be  ministered  unto, 
but  to  minister,  and  to  give  His  soul  a  ransom  for 
manv. 

Being  thus  endowed.  He  was  pleased  to  choose 
men  to  continue  His  personal  ministry  in  the 
Church  which  He  had  purchased  with  His  own 
Blood,  and  these  persons  He  solemnly  commis- 
sioned, and  to  them  and  their  successors  He  prom- 
ised His  Presence  to  enable  them  to  accomplish 
His  Will,  until  the  end  of  the  world.  "As  My 
Father  hath  sent  Me  even  so  send  I  you."  "Lo,  I 
am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world." 

It  was  evident,  from  the  very  first,  that  minis- 
terial agency  was  a  leading  principle  of  His  King- 
dom. He  had  many  disciples.  St.  Paul  tells  us 
that  there  were  more  than  five  hundred  of  these, 
who  could  personally  bear  witness  of  His  resur- 
rection, having  seen  Him  themselves,  after  He 
rose  from  the  dead. 

But  it  was  not  His  will  that  the  general  as- 
sembly of  His  disciples  should  be  His  chosen  wit- 
nesses. From  the  first,  He  made  that  fact  evi- 
dent.    Calling  together  His  disciples,  He  chose 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  89 


twelve,  whom  also  He  named  Apostles.  From 
that  day  they  were  His  ministers.  By  them  He 
baptized,  by  their  hands  He  fed  the  multitudes, 
and  to  them  He  said,  ^'I  have  chosen  you,  and  or- 
dained you."  To  them  alone,  at  the  outset.  He 
gave  authority  to  preach,  to  baptize,  to  absolve,  to 
administer  the  Holy  Communion.  "He,  through 
the  Holy  Ghost,  had  given  commandment  to  the 
Apostles,  whom  He  had  chosen." 

It  was  evidently  His  will  that  something  anal- 
ogous to  Apostolic  Succession  should  be  the  prin- 
ciple on  which  Church  authority  should  be  trans- 
mitted. He  did  not  act  on  the  theory  that  all  ec- 
clesiastical powder  is  vested  in  the  whole  body  of 
the  disciples,  and  that  ministers,  when  performing 
the  duties  of  their  office,  are  simply  the  delegates 
of  the  people,  doing  what  the  whole  body  of  believ- 
ers could  not  conveniently  do. 

He  could  easily  have  ordered  matters  so  that 
the  principle  of  popular  rights  should  be  main- 
tained, had  He  so  willed.  He  might  have  chosen 
the  twelve  Apostles  by  popular  election;  control- 
ling the  whole  body  of  His  disciples  to  choose 
them,  for  the  hearts  of  men  are  in  His  hand,  but 
He  did  not  do  so.  He  selected  them  personally, 
and  committed  the  supreme  control  of  the  entire 
Church  into  their  hands. 


90  Fundamental  Chnrcli  Principles. 

The  first  act  of  the  Apostles  was  to  fill  the 
place  of  Judas,  the  traitor,  not  by  popular  election, 
tut  by  lot ;  and  so  far  as  the  sacred  history  informs 
us,  these  Apostles  were  the  only  Ministers,  until 
the  selection  and  ordination  of  the  ''Seven" ;  al- 
though it  is  probable  that  elders  and  deacons  al- 
ready existed.  It  would  be  strange  if  the  "Sev- 
enty," whom  our  Lord  appointed,  should  all  have 
ceased  to  exercise  their  ministry,  and  the  fact  that 
the  names  of  the  "Seven"  indicate  that  they  were 
selected  as  the  representatives  of  the  interests  of 
the  Hellenists,  seems  to  imply  that  the  Hebrew 
portion  of  the  Church  was  already  fully  repre- 
sented. 

The  "Seven"  were  designated  for  an  office  of  a 
secular  character,  the  administration  of  the  funds 
of  the  Church ;  yet  they  were  set  apart  for  it,  by 
the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  Apostles.  It  is 
the  first  Christian  ordination,  after  our  Lord's 
Ascension,  and  it  teaches  us  that,  according  to 
Apostolic  rule,  every  Minister  of  the  Church  re- 
quired this  imposition  of  Apostolic  hands. 

If  it  was  necessary  to  lay  hands  on  these  men 
to  consecrate  them  to  serve  in  a  comparatively  sec- 
ular office,  surely,  none  would  be  suffered  to  ad- 
minister the  Word  and  Sacraments  without  or- 
dination. 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  91 


Next  in  order  we  read  of  the  Confirmation  of 
the  Samaritans,  whom  Philip  had  converted,  and 
baptized.  Although  this  Minister  of  the  Church 
could  preach  the  Gospel  with  such  power  that 
many  among  the  Samaritans  believed  on  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  although  he  had  authority  to  baptize, 
although  he  had  power  to  work  miracles,  yet  there 
were  ministerial  functions  that  he  had  not  been 
empowered  to  perform.  Two  of  the  Apostles  had 
to  go  to  the  Samaritans,  and  by  prayer  and  the 
laying  on  of  hands  confer  on  them  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

It  was,  therefore,  the  will  of  God  that  in  the 
Christian  Ministrv  there  should  be  an  order  of 
men  empowered  to  perform  some  spiritual  func- 
tions, without  power  to  perform  all.  The  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  records,  in  the  nineteenth  Chapter, 
another  Confirmation ;  where,  after  Christian  Bap- 
tism, an  Apostle  lays  his  hands  on  the  disciples 
and  they  receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  indicates 
that  it  was  the  rule  in  Apostolic  days,  and  St. 
Paul's  question  to  the  Ephesian  disciples,  ''Have 
you  received  the  Holy  Ghost  since  you  believed  ?" 
shows  how  carefully  Confirmation  was  observed  in 
all  cases. 

We  learn,  also,  from  the  Confirmation  of  the 
Samaritans,  that  no  ability  to  judge  the  spiritual 


92  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

fitness  of  the  disciple  rested  in  the  Apostles  and 
Evangelists  of  the  first  age  of  the  Church. 
Neither  Peter  nor  Philip  could  say  whether  a  man 
was  rightly  prepared  for  baptism  or  Confirmation. 
They  could  only  judge  by  external  appearances. 
They  possessed  none  of  the  attributes  of  infalli- 
bility. 

We  also  see  that  it  made  all  the  difference  in 
the  world  whether  a  man  was  rightly  prepared  or 
not.  In  the  one  case  he  received  the  Holy  Ghost, 
in  the  other  he  received  nothing  but  greater  con- 
demnation. Simon,  the  sorcerer,  is  baptized  by 
Philip  and  confirmed  by  Peter  and  John,  but  they 
confer  no  blessing  on  him;  he  remains  in  the  gall 
of  bitterness,  and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity,  and  has 
neither  part  nor  lot  in  the  heritage  of  the  saints, 
because  his  heart  had  not  been  right  in  the  sight  of 
God,  when  he  confessed  the  Faith  in  baptism. 

How  strongly  does  this  tragedy  enforce  the 
Apostolic  precept,  "Judge  yourselves,  brethren, 
that  ye  be  not  judged  of  the  Lord."  The  faithful- 
ness of  the  Ministry  cannot  supply  moral  sincerity 
in  the  disciple. 

The  statement  of  the  inspired  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  that  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands  is  one  of  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of 
Christ,  as  universal  in  its  obligation,  as  repent- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  93 

ance,  faith,  and  baptism,  of  itself  teaches  that  it 
is  God's  will  that  successors  of  the  Apostles  should 
ever  remain  in  the  Church,  to  confer  this  grace 
which  He  had  reserved  to  the  Apostolic  Order. 

While  the  Church  was  confined  to  the  little 
city  of  Jerusalem,  the  permanent  population  of 
which  was  probably  not  more  than  50,000,  the 
Christian  Ministry  might  practically  remain  in 
the  Apostolate,  as  in  a  germ;  but  when,  as  the 
consequence  of  persecution,  it  began  to  spread 
abroad  throughout  the  world,  a  delegation  of  min- 
isterial powers  to  other  men  became  necessary. 

Presently  we  find  other  Apostles  mentioned, 
besides  the  Twelve:  James,  the  brother  of  the 
Lord ;  Paul,  Barnabas,  and  others ;  and  at  the  same 
time  we  observe  that,  instead  of  the  one  centre  of 
Christian  activitv  at  Jerusalem,  churches  have 
sprung  up  throughout  all  Judea,  and  Galilee,  and 
Samaria.  The  control  of  the  Church  at  Jerusa- 
lem by  the  twelve  Apostles,  acting  as  one  body,  is 
ended.  One  of  their  number  attains  the  crown  of 
martyrdom,  and  probably  the  rest  were  dispersed 
among  the  different  churches,  to  avoid  bitter  per- 
secution. 

At  all  events,  the  headship  of  the  Church  in 
Jerusalem  devolves  on  one  man,  James,  the  brother 
of  the  Lord.     He  was  not  one  of  the  Twelve,  but 


94  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

had  been  added  to  the  company  of  the  Apostles; 
and  we  find  liim,  for  years,  ruling  the  Church  at 
Jerusalem  as  its  ecclesiastical  head. 

When  Peter  escapes  from  prison,  he  asks  that 
notice  be  sent  to  James  and  the  brethren.  When 
the  first  Council  is  held  at  Jerusalem,  James  sums 
up  the  debate,  and  his  powerful  influence  deter- 
mines the  policy  of  the  Church  on  the  burning 
question  that  then  was  troubling  the  peace  of 
many. 

Long  years  after,  when  St.  Paul  comes  to  Jeru- 
salem, after  his  third  journey,  he  is  reported  to 
have  had  an  audience  with  James,  all  the  elders 
being  present.  St.  Paul,  in  mentioning  those  who 
seemed  to  be  pillars  of  the  Church,  puts  this  man 
James  before  Peter  and  John,  and  he  refers  to 
the  Jewish  Christians  who  gave  him  so  much 
trouble  at  Antioch  as  certain  persons,  "who  had 
come  from  James"  ;  doubtless  because  they  had  let- 
ters commendatory  from  the  head  of  the  Church 
at  Jerusalem.  All  these  notices  substantiate  the 
ancient  tradition,  that  James  was  the  first  Bishop 
of  Jerusalem. 

About  the  time  that  James  was  appointed  the 
head  of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem,  we  hear  of  an- 
other order  of  Church  officers,  the  Elders.  When 
.,hey  were  first  appointed,  or  what  was  their  office, 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  95 

we  are  not  told.  The  first  notice  of  them  is  the 
statement  that  the  alms  for  the  relief  of  the  poor 
Christians  at  Jerusalem  was  sent  by  the  hands  of 
Barnabas  and  Saul,  from  Antioch,  to  the  Elders. 
They  are  mentioned  with  the  Apostles  and  breth- 
ren in  connection  with  the  Council  at  Jerusalem, 
and  we  are  told  they  were  present  when  St.  Paul 
had  his  audience  with  James,  after  his  third  mis- 
sionary journey.  But  of  their  authority  and  min- 
istry we  are  told  nothing  whatever. 

Many  questions  regarding  the  Apostolic 
Church  at  Jerusalem  wait  in  vain  for  an  answer. 
Whether  the  elders  were  the  pastors  of  the  differ- 
ent congregations  of  the  city,  or  a  sort  of  senate 
under  J  ames,  the  Bishop ;  what  the  relations  were 
between  the  authority  of  James  and  the  other 
Apostles ;  why  the  elders  and  brethren  of  the  local 
Church  at  Jerusalem  joined  with  the  Apostles  in 
laying  down  the  law  for  the  Gentile  Christians  of 
Cilicia;  and  how  the  Jewish  and  Christian  sys- 
tems were  reconciled,  so  that  men  were  Christians 
and  yet  zealous  for  the  law — for  even  St.  Paul 
walked  orderly  and  kept  the  law,  while  protest- 
ing against  its  imposition  on  the  Gentiles — these 
questions,  and  many  others,  we  cannot  answer. 

No  doubt  much  pertaining  to  the  organization 
of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  was  temporary,  ow- 


96  Fimdamental  Church  Principles. 

ing  to  the  Jewish  element  pervading  it,  and  so  is 
not  mentioned  in  Holv  Scripture,  as  it  could  not 
be  the  rule  of  the  Church  in  after  ages.  But, 
plainly,  the  Ministry  was  Apostolic,  merging  into 
an  Episcopal  rule,  under  James,  as  the  permanent 
Bishop. 

If  we  turn  to  St.  Paul,  we  find  an  Apostle 
whose  mission  was  from  the  Lord,  and  whose  ju- 
risdiction was  designated  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
Holy  Ghost  said,  "Separate  Me  Barnabas  aiul 
Saul  for  the  work  whereunto  I  have  called  them." 
With  an  earnest  service  of  benediction,  the  Apos- 
tles were  sent  forth  on  the  new  errand,  to  the 
Gentile  heathen. 

From  that  day  began  the  wonderful  work  of 
the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  In  many  lands  he 
planted  the  Church,  and  everywhere  ruled  it  with 
absolute  authority,  which  he  never  permitted  any- 
one to  dispute.  In  all  his  letters  there  is  not  a 
hint  that  in  any  of  the  churches  founded  by  him 
there  was  any  ministerial  organization  which 
would  remove  it  from  his  supervision,  or  render  it 
independent  of  his  authority.  He  ordained  elders 
in  every  city ;  he  told  his  converts,  plainly,  to  sub- 
mit themselves  to  this  appointed  Ministry ;  but  the 
control  of  all  matters  he  reserved  in  his  own  hands. 
Attached  to  him  there  was  a  staff  of  Ministers,  the 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  97 

most  prominent  of  whom  were  Timothy,  Titus, 
Silas,  Epaphras,  Luke,  Erastus,  Demas,  Aris- 
tarchus,  and  Tychicus,  by  means  of  whom  he  kept 
up  constant  communication  with  the  churches  un- 
der his  jurisdiction.  Again  and  again  he  com- 
mands his  converts  and  the  whole  membership  of 
some  particular  church,  ministers  and  people,  to 
receive  these  envoys,  or  Vicars- Apostolic,  and  obey 
them  as  his  representatives. 

For  example,  he  says  to  the  Corinthian 
Church,  "I  have  sent  unto  you  Timotheus,  who 
shall  bring  you  into  remembrance  of  my  ways, 
which  be  in  Christ  as  I  teach  everywhere  in  the 
Church" ;  and  again,  "ISTow,  if  Timotheus  come, 
see  that  he  may  be  with  you,  without  fear ;  for  he 
worketh  the  work  of  the  Lord,  as  I  also  do.  Let 
no  man,  therefore,  despise  him,  but  conduct  him 
forth  in  peace,  that  he  may  come  unto  me." 

He  sends  Titus  to  this  troublesome,  insubor- 
dinate church  on  another  occasion,  and  notes  that 
his  representative  had  been  received  "with  fear 
and  trembling."  In  sending  him  to  them  again, 
he  designates  him  his  "partner,  and  fellow  la- 
borer" ;  and  with  him  he  sends  another  vicarj, 
whom  he  describes  as  "our  brother  whom  we  have 
oftentimes  proved  diligent  in  many  things." 
Tychicus  he  sends  to  the  Colossians,  "that  he  may 
know  their  state." 


98  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Such  was  the  oversight  or  episcopacy  exercised 
by  this  Apostle  over  all  the  churches  he  had  plant- 
ed. Thej  were  all  closely  watched  and  controlled, 
either  by  himself  or  by  men  who  were  in  his  con- 
fidence, who  were  attached  to  his  person,  as  his 
companions,  and  consequently  knew  how  he  would 
act,  under  any  circumstances  that  might  arise. 

What  provision  did  he  make  for  the  govern- 
ment of  these  churches  after  his  death  ?  We  have 
full  information  given,  in  three  Epistles,  written 
not  very  long  before  his  martyrdom,  and  these  give 
us  his  determination  respecting  the  supply  of  the 
Church's  needs. 

They  contain  a  solemn  transmittal  of  his  Apos- 
tolical authority,  to  these  two  men,  through  whom, 
as  his  ministers,  he  had  so  long  acted,  and  they 
fail  to  give  any  intimation  that  this  authority  was 
to  cease,  and  be  superceded  by  any  more  demo- 
cratic form  of  government.  They  provide  for  the 
exercise  of  Apostolic  authority  through  individ- 
uals, and  they  make  no  provision  for  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  by  Synods  of  presbyters,  all 
officially  equal  and  deciding  their  differences  by  a 
majority  of  votes.  They  assume  the  continuance 
of  Apostolic  authority  in  the  persons  of  Timothy 
and  Titus. 

Timothy  is  invested  with  authority  over  min- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  99 

isters  and  teachers.  He  is  to  charge  that  they 
teach  no  other  doctrine.  He  is  told  the  qualifica- 
tions of  Bishops  and  deacons,  as  if  he  alone  was 
to  choose  them  and  ordain  them.  He  is  the  judge 
regarding  elders  and  widows,  as  if  discipline  had 
been  fully  committed  to  him.  Again,  in  his  sec- 
ond letter,  the  Apostle  gives  directions  to  Timothy 
regarding  ordination,  and  he  is  told  how  he  must 
deal  with  heresies  and  those  who  fomented  them. 

So,  also,  Titus  is  left  in  Crete  to  set  in  order 
things  that  are  wanting,  and  to  ordain  elders  in 
every  city,  and  he  is  reminded  what  the  qualifica- 
tions of  the  ministry  are,  as  if  he  alone  was  re- 
sponsible for  appointment  and  ordination.  Dis- 
cipline is  committed  to  him  fully.  He  is  to  re- 
buke sharply,  to  rebuke  with  all  authority,  and  to 
reject  or  excommunicate  the  heretic,  after  the  first 
or  second  admonition.  It  is  clear,  then,  that  the 
Apostle  committed  to  these  two  men  authority 
over  these  churches,  and  all  their  ministers  and 
teachers. 

These  three  pastoral  epistles  are  the  only  let- 
ters in  the  New  Testament  in  which  there  are  any 
directions  regarding  the  government  of  the 
churches.  In  no  other  epistle  is  there  a  word  re- 
specting the  choice,  qualifications,  or  ordination 
of  ministers,  and  these  three  epistles  are  written  to 


100  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


individuals,  men  who  had  long  acted  as  the  Vicars- 
Apostolic  of  St.  Paul,  and  they  are  not  written  to 
churches.  Surely,  if  it  had  been  God's  will  that 
His  Church  should  be  ruled  after  some  democratic 
model,  directions  would  have  been  sent  to  the 
churches  themselves. 

If  the  people  were  to  be  the  source  of  Church 
power,  or  if  the  authority  hitherto  exercised  by 
the  Apostles  was  to  be  vested  in  a  Board  of  Pres- 
byters, would  not  these  letters  have  been  directed 
to  the  churches  of  Ephcsus,  and  of  Crete,  or  to 
the  presbyters  living  and  working  there  ?  Would 
they  not  have  been  told  that  the  power  and  the 
responsibility  of  Church  government  now  de- 
volved on  them,  and  that  they  must  beware,  lest 
any  companion  or  fellow-helper  of  the  Apostle 
should  usurp  the  power  and  authority  which  was 
now  committed  to  them  ? 

But  no  such  warnings  were  given.  They  are 
not  bidden  to  guard  their  rights  and  liberties  in 
this  matter  of  Church  government,  but  are  told 
to  submit  themselves.  Nor  is  there  a  hint  in  these 
letters  that  the  authority  committed  to  Timothy 
and  Titus  was  abnormal  and  temporary,  and  was 
to  be  succeeded  by  a  new  kind  of  Church  govern- 
ment, in  which  there  would  be  no  head  of  the  local 
Church,  such  as  the  people  hitherto  had  been  ac- 
customed to. 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  101 


Not  a  word  is  said  to  Titus  or  Timothy  about 
constituting  the  elders  of  Ephesus  and  Crete  into 
synods  and  presbyteries,  with  independent  power 
to  ordain  and  to  govern.  On  the  contrary,  Tim- 
othy is  to  see  that  he  lays  hands  suddenly  on  no 
man,  and  Titus  is  responsible  for  the  ordination 
of  elders  in  every  city. 

In  the  last  of  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 
we  have  messages  sent  to  the  Angels,  or  Messengers 
of  the  Seven  Churches,  who,  beyond  any  serious 
question,  were  men  occupying  the  place  and  re- 
sponsibility of  the  Chief  Pastor.  It  is  noticeable 
that  the  various  epithets,  "dead,  cold,  hot,  poor, 
rich,  blind,  naked,"  characterizing  the  condition 
of  the  different  churches,  do  not  agree  in  gender 
with  Ecclesia,  but  with  the  masculine  noun,  An- 
gelas. So  that,  as  far  as  the  New  Testament  testi- 
mony is  concerned,  the  Church  is  represented  al- 
ways as  controlled  and  ordered  by  Episcopal  au- 
thority, received  from  the  Apostles.  The  Min- 
istry was  developed,  not  from  below,  but  from 
above;  not  by  elevation  from  the  people,  but  by 
devolution  from  our  Lord,  through  His  Apostles. 

Necessity  was  the  law  which  governed  this  de- 
velopment. When  the  rapid  growth  of  the  Church 
rendered  the  Apostles  unequal  to  the  discharge  of 
certain    secular   duties,    they    appointed    and   or- 


102         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


dained  seven  men  to  execute  this  function.  This 
was  succeeded  by  the  delegation  of  the  duties  of 
teaching,  government,  and  discipline,  to  presbyters 
or  elders,  in  congregations  over  which  the  Apostles 
could  not  exercise  any  continuous  personal  super- 
intendence, and  these,  in  turn,  were  controlled  by 
the  Apostles  themselves,  or  by  vicars  appointed  by 
them  for  this  purpose.  Provision  is  made,  so  far 
as  we  have  any  knowledge,  throughout  the  Church 
for  the  continuance  of  this  Episcopal  form  of  gov- 
ernnient,by  men  wlio  have  received  their  commis- 
sion and  authority  from  the  Apostles. 

The  last  glimpse  we  have  of  the  state  of  the 
Church  in  the  Revelation  shows  that  it  is  every- 
where ruled  by  one  man,  whom  the  Apostle  recog- 
nizes as  the  head  of  the  Church,  and  to  whom  he 
addresses  his  letter  of  rebuke  or  of  encouragement. 
When  we  pass  from  the  New  Testament  to  the 
records  of  ecclesiastical  history,  an  impenetrable 
cloud  seems  to  cover  the  closing  years  of  the  first 
and  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  But 
as  soon  as  the  cloud  lifts,  and  discloses  the  state 
of  the  Church  to  our  view,  before  the  middle  of 
the  second  century,  in  every  Christian  community 
we  observe  there  was  a  chief  functionary,  uni- 
formly styled  its  Bishop,  with  two  inferior  orders 
of  ministers  under  him,  known  as  presbyters  and 
deacons. 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  103 


Under  what  circumstances  did  this  form  of 
government  arise,  and  with  what  amount  of  au- 
thority was  it  invested?  Was  Episcopacy  an  in- 
stitution of  Divine  origin,  absolute  and  indispens- 
able, or  was  it  destitute  of  Apostolic  sanction  and 
authority?  Was  it  merely  an  oiRce,  desirable, 
perhaps,  to  secure  good  government,  which  men  in- 
vented in  troublous  times,  but  not  at  all  essential 
to  the  existence  of  Apostolic  order  ? 

Whether  our  Lord,  in  speaking  to  His  Apostles 
concerning  the  things  pertaining  to  the  Kingdom 
of  God,  outlined  the  orders  of  the  Christian  Min- 
istry, as  He  knew  it  was  about  to  take  shape  in 
His  Church,  or  whether  He  left  these  details  to  the 
hour  when  necessity  would  demand  them,  we  can- 
not say.  Nothing  is  recorded.  But,  probably, 
the  Apostles  were  left  free  to  act,  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  welfare  of  the 
Church  might  seem  to  require,  and  the  Orders  of 
the  Church,  as  they  constituted  them,  have  that 
Divine  sanction  which  the  commission  implies, 
"As  My  Father  hath  sent  Me,  even  so  send  I  you." 
They  rest  on  the  same  ground  as  Infant  Baptism, 
Confirmation,  and  the  observance  of  the  Lord's 
Dav. 

We  have  seen  how  the  institution  of  the  Chris- 
tian Ministry  developed  under  the  Apostles  them- 


104  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

selves,  and,  as  soon  as  the  light  of  history  breaks 
in  and  shows  us  the  state  of  the  Church  some  fiftv 
years  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  wlierever  we 
hear  of  a  local  Church,  we  find  it,  without  excep- 
tion, under  the  government  of  a  Bishop,  and  that 
without  any  indication  that  there  ever  was  a  time 
when  it  was  otherwise.  In  the  interval  between 
these  two  dates  there  is  not  much  information  at 
our  disposal,  but  it  distinctly  upholds  the  conten- 
tion that  Episcopacy  was  the  form  of  government 
in  the  Church  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles. 

The  first  Epistle  of  Clement  was,  no  doubt, 
written  from  Rome  to  the  Corinthians,  shortly  be- 
fore the  close  of  the  first  century.  He  mentions 
the  Ministrv  there  as  composed  of  presbyters  and 
deacons,  but  he  also  speaks  of  the  Church  there  as 
"obedient  to  those  who  have  the  rule  over  you, 
and  giving  all  fitting  honor  to  the  presbyters 
among  you";  and  he  distinctly  states  that  the 
Ministry  is  perpetuated  by  ordinations  of  the 
Apostles  and  their  successors  in  the  Episcopal 
oflBce. 

He  uses  the  word  "Episcopate"  to  denote  the 
office  of  presbyter,  and  "Bishop"  to  designate  the 
presbyter,  for  at  that  early  day  the  titles  of  the 
Ministry  had  not  assumed  definite  form.  Thinsrs 
being  always,  as  Hooker  says,  "ancienter  than  their 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  105 

names,"  and  only  after  the  thing  has  been  adopted 
for  a  time  does  general  use  agree  as  to  the  name. 

And  the  word  "bishop,"  or  overseer,  was,  in  the 
first  age  of  the  Church,  used  to  designate  the  over- 
seer of  a  vast  diocese,  and  the  overseer  of  a  handful 
of  people  assembling  for  worship  in  some  garret. 

Bearing  that  in  mind,  let  us  observe  the  testi- 
mony of  Clement.  "Our  Apostles,"  he  says, 
''knew,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  there 
would  be  strife  on  account  of  the  office  of  the  Epis- 
copate. For  this  reason,  therefore,  they  ap- 
pointed those  ministers  already  mentioned,  and 
afterwards  gave  instructions  that  when  these 
should  fall  asleep,  other  approved  men  should  suc- 
ceed them  in  the  ministry.  We  are  of  opinion, 
therefore,  that  those  appointed  by  them,  or  after- 
wards by  other  eminent  men,  *  *  *  cannot 
be  justly  dismissed  from  the  ministry.  Blessed 
are  those  presbji;ers,  who,  having  finished  their 
course,  have  obtained  a  fruitful  and  perfect  de- 
parture" (Clement  ad.  Cor.  C.  44). 

Here  we  observe  that  the  presbyters  have  not 
been  ordained  by  their  fellow  presbyters,  but  by 
Apostles,  or  other  eminent  men.  Apparently  the 
local  Church  at  Corintli,  as  in  St.  Paul's  day,  was 
superintended  by  an  itinerant  episcopate,  and 
either  the  person  whose  duty  it  was  to  care  for  it 


106  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

had  died,  or  had  proved  unfaithful,  as  was  the  case 
with  some  of  the  vicars  whom  St.  Paul  employed, 
as  he  tells  us  in  the  pathetic  letters  written  from 
his  Roman  prison.  But  all  the  presbyters  at  Cor- 
inth had  been  ordained  by  Apostles  and  other  emi- 
nent men,  and  Clement  evidently  had  no  idea  that 
any  other  ordination  was  possible. 

Another  fragment  from  that  early  age  is  the 
Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  written,  schol- 
ars think,  by  some  Jewish  Christian  for  his  coun- 
trMuen  in  a  remote  part  of  Syria.  His  theol- 
ogy was  very  inadequate,  and  his  doctrinal  in- 
struction very  meagre.  But  he  throws  some  light 
on  the  Church  organization  in  the  place  where  he 
lived.  There  is  a  local  ministry  of  Bishops  (that 
is,  presbyters)  and  deacons,  but  over  them  we  find 
a  ministry  of  Apostles,  prophets,  and  teachers,  not 
yet  localized  in  any  particular  Church,  but  like 
that  ambulatory  Episcopate  by  which  St.  Paul  gov- 
erned the  Churches.  The  functions  of  that  higher 
ministry  the  writer  does  not  mention,  being  con- 
cerned merely  with  the  duties  of  the  presbyters 
and  deacons;  but  he  implies  its  right  to  settle  in 
the  local  Church  when  it  sees  fit  to  do  so. 

Xext  in  order  comes  the  disputed  testimony  of 
Ignatius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,  against  which  those 
who   have   lost   the   episcopate    and   find    it   nee- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  107 


essary  to  justify  themselves  have  fought  so  des- 
perately. I  presume  it  is  practically  settled  that 
the  shorter  version  of  the  seven  Epistles  of  Igna- 
tius, and  not  the  Syriac  version  of  three  of  these 
Epistles,  is  the  authentic  utterance  of  this  writer. 
But,  in  any  case,  his  testimony  with  regard  to  the 
three  orders  of  the  Sacred  Ministry  is  distinct  and 
unequivocal. 

In  the  Syriac  version  of  the  Epistle  to  Poly- 
carp  (C.  6.),  he  says,  "Look  ye  to  the  Bishop  that 
God  also  may  look  upon  you."  "I  will  be  instead 
of  the  souls  of  those  who  are  subject  to  the  Bishop, 
and  the  presbyters,  and  the  deacons."  And,  at 
great  length,  he  dwells  on  the  office  of  Bishops, 
in  the  shorter  form  of  the  seven  Greek  Epistles, 
his  theme  being,  first,  the  Incarnation,  and  sec- 
ondly, the  visible  organization  of  Bishops,  presby- 
ters, and  deacons,  in  the  Church  of  God.  He 
gives  no  hint  whatever  that  in  the  brief  interval 
between  the  time  of  the  rule  of  the  Apostles  them- 
selves and  the  date  of  his  Epistles,  there  had  been 
a  period  when  the  presbyters  exercised  functions 
now  reserved  to  the  Bishop. 

The  testimony  of  Ignatius  explains,  also,  the 
letter  of  Polycarp  to  the  Philippians.  For  the 
occasion  of  the  letter  of  the  Bishop  of  Smyrna  rose 
v-ut  of  the  request  of  Ignatius,  that  the  Philippian 


108  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Christians  would  send  a  letter  to  the  bereaved 
Chnrch  of  Antioch.  The  distance  was  so  great 
that  the  Philippiaus  could  not  send  a  messenger  to 
Antioch,  and  they  wrote  to  Polycarp,  asking  him 
to  forward  their  message  to  the  sorrowing  flock  of 
Ignatius. 

The  letter  of  Polycarp,  in  assent  to  this  re- 
quest, has  been  preserved.  He  writes  as  a  Bishop 
(Ignatius  tells  us  he  was  Bishop  of  Smyrna),  the 
style  of  his  address  being,  ''Polycarp  and  the  pres- 
byters with  him" ;  but  he  only  speaks  of  ciders  and 
deacons,  at  Philippi.  Xo  Bishop  is  mentioned  as 
li\-ing  or  ruling  there.  Were,  then,  the  presbyters 
and  deacons  the  only  Church  authorities  at  that 
time,  recognized  at  Philippi  ?  If  the  letter  of 
Polycarp  stood  alone,  we  might  be  tempted  to  an- 
swer this  question  in  the  affinnative.  But  it  does 
not  stand  alone.  We  read  it  with  the  letters  of 
Ignatius,  written  at  that  time. 

From  these  we  learn  that  Episcopacy  was  ex- 
tended to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  In  the  3d  Chapter 
of  his  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  Ignatius  speaks  of 
the  "Bishops  settled  everywhere,  to  the  utmost 
bounds  of  the  earth."  In  the  3d  Chapter  of  his 
Epistle  to  the  Trallians  he  says:  "Let  all  rever- 
ence the  deacons  as  an  appointment  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  the  Bishop  as  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 


The  Sacred  Ministrij.  109 

presbyters  as  the  Sanhedrim  of  God.  Apart  from 
these  there  is  no  Church."  After  writing  in  this 
style  at  Smyrna,  he  goes  his  way  to  Philippi,  en- 
joyed cordial  intercourse  with  the  Christians  there, 
and  departed,  leaving  behind  him  a  venerated 
name  and  an  earnest  desire  to  carry  out  his  wishes. 

There  is  no  sign  that  he  rebuked  them  or  re- 
monstrated with  them.  And  yet  it  is  impossible 
that  the  man  wdio  had  declared  that  without  the 
three  orders  of  the  Ministry  there  could  be  no 
Church  should  suddenly  have  become  indifferent 
to  the  absence  of  a  Bishop  at  Philippi.  Probably 
the  true  explanation  of  the  state  of  the  Church 
at  Philippi  was  this:  As  in  the  case  of  the 
Churches  of  Asia,  in  the  age  of  St.  Paul,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Corinthians,  when  Clement  addressed 
his  Epistle  to  them,  there  was  no  localized  Bishop, 
but  they  were  ruled,  and  their  clergy  were  or- 
dained by  vicars  Apostolic,  who  from  time  to  time 
visited  them,  and  took  order  for  their  spiritual 
welfare.  In  fact,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Ignatius 
himself  was  not  the  localized  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
but  the  representative  of  Apostolic  authority  in 
the  region  of  Syria. 

Another  voice  that  comes  to  us  out  of  the  mist 
that  covers  the  period  between  the  Apostolic  age 
and  the  middle  of  the   Second  Century,   is  the 


110  Fundamental  Church  Principles, 

Shepherd  of  Ilermas.  Its  exact  date  is  uncertain. 
Some  think  it  was  written  about  the  close  of  the 
first  centurv.  Some  would  date  it  as  late  as  the 
year  140.  Ilermas  speaks  of  deacons  and  of  pres- 
byters, or  those  who  occupy  the  chief  seat;  and 
he  also  mentions  rulers  as  distinguished  from  those 
occupying  the  chief  seat ;  so  that  he  seems  to  sug- 
gest the  same  orders  in  the  Church  that  are  men- 
tioned in  the  Epistle  of  Clement. 

Such  is  the  tendency  of  the  fragmentary  evi- 
dence at  our  disposal  down  to  the  middle  of  the 
second  century.  Beyond  question  there  was  then 
established  in  every  part  of  Christendom  a  Minis- 
try of  Bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  claiming  to 
be  Apostolic  in  its  origin,  and  in  its  authority. 
The  Ministry  was  every^vhere  recognized  as  having 
this  character,  and  nowhere  is  there  a  trace  of 
dissent  or  dissatisfaction  on  the  ground  that  it  was 
a  usurpation  of  authority,  which  at  one  time  had 
been  exercised  by  presbyters  and  not  by  Bishops. 

Ilegesippus  was  born  early  in  the  second  cen- 
tury, and  he  Avrote  not  later  than  A.  D.  175  a  col- 
lection of  memoirs  or  reminiscences  of  the  Apos- 
tolic and  post-Apostolic  ages.  Eusebius  had  this 
book  under  his  eye  when  he  wrote  his  ecclesiast- 
ical history,  and  he  quotes  from  it.  "We  learn  that 
Hegesippus  journeyed   westward   from   Syria   to 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  Ill 

Italy,  A.  D.  145-150.  He  met  a  great  many 
Bishops,  and  received  the  same  doctrine  from  all. 
In  the  course  of  his  journey  he  abode  many  days  at 
Corinth,  and  mentions  Primus,  the  Bishop  of  the 
Corinthian  Church.  Afterwards,  when  iri  Rome, 
he  made  a  succession  (a  catalogue)  of  the  Bishops 
down  to  Anicetus.  He  adds,  "Now,  in  each  suc- 
cession, and  in  each  city,  it  is  as  the  law  proclaims, 
and  the  prophets,  and  the  Lord."  As  an  illus- 
tration of  the  meaning  of  Hegesippus  in  using  the 
word  Sta  So^r/v  (succcssion)  we  might  refer  to 
the  work  of  Sotion  on  the  "successions"  or  the  suc- 
cessive chiefs  of  the  Philosophic  Schools.  The 
title  of  the  work  is  at  AtaSoxat- 

Hegesippus  then  had  found  a  succession  of 
bishops  in  every  city. 

Such  was  the  state  of  the  Church  A.  D.  150. 
The  same  writer  also  speaks  of  the  Episcopal  suc- 
cession of  the  See  of  Jerusalem,  mentioning 
Synieon  as  the  second  Bishop,  after  the  death  of 
James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord.  Contemporary 
with  Hegesippus  was  Irenaeus,  born  between  the 
years  A.  D.  120-130.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Poly- 
carp;  of  whom  he  says  (III.  iii.  4.),  that  he  was 
instructed  by  Apostles;  and  also,  by  Apostles  in 
Asia,  appointed  Bishop  of  the  Church  in  Smyrna. 
He  goes  on  to  say  that  Polycarp  taught  the  things 


112  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

which  he  had  learned  of  the  Apostles,  and  which 
alone  are  true,  and  which  the  Church  has  handed 
down.  "To  these  things  all  the  Asiatic  Churches 
testify,  as  do  also  those  men  who  have  succeeded 
Polvcarp,  do^vn  to  the  present  time." 

Irenaeus  became  a  presbyter  in  Gaul,  under  the 
Bishop  Pothinus,  and  after  the  martyrdom  of  that 
confessor,  he  succeeded  him.  In  his  contest  with 
heretics,  he  lays  emphasis  on  the  rule  of  faith, 
handed  down  from  the  Apostles ;  and  the  keepers 
of  this  sacred  tradition  are,  he  tells  us,  the  Bishops 
of  the  Church. 

He  says,  "True  knowledge  is  the  doctrine  of 
the  Apostles,  and  the  ancient  system  of  the  Church 
in  all  the  world,  and  the  character  of  the  Body  of 
Christ,  according  to  the  successions  of  the  Bishops, 
to  whom  they  delivered  the  Church  in  each  sep- 
arate place  (Bk.  IV.,  xxxiii.  8).  He  says,  "The 
path  of  those  belonging  to  the  Church,  circum- 
scribes the  whole  world,  as  possessing  the  sure  tra- 
dition of  the  Apostles,  and  gives  unto  us  to  see  that 
the  faith  of  all  is  one  and  the  same,  since  all  receive 
one  and  the  same  'God,'  the  Father,  and  believe  in 
the  same  dispensation  regarding  the  Incarnation  of 
the  Son  of  God,  and  are  cognizant  of  the  same  gift 
of  the  Spirit,  and  preserve  the  same  form  of  that 
ordination  which  belongs  to  the  Church,  and  ex- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  113 

pect  the  same  coming  of  the  Lord,  and  await  the 
same  salvation  of  the  whole  man,  both  soul  and 
body"  (Bk.  v.,  XX.  1). 

There  is,  we  see,  in  the  mind  of  Irenaeus,  a 
picture  of  the  Universal  Church  spread  all  over  the 
world,  handing  down  the  truth  as  delivered  by  the 
Apostles ;  and  the  bond  of  union,  that  connects  the 
generations  in  the  Church,  is  the  Episcopal  Suc- 
cession, to  whom,  he  says,  the  Apostles  delivered 
the  Church,  in  each  separate  place.  He  knows  of 
no  exception  to  this  form  of  Church  government. 
In  this  day,  the  terminology  by  which  the  offices  of 
the  sacred  ministry  were  designated,  was  still  in 
process  of  formation.  He  calls  the  Bishops,  Pres- 
byters in  several  places,  but  he  makes  it  plain  that 
he  means  to  designate  Bishops  ruling  the  Church 
as  the  successors  of  the  Apostles.  For  example,  in 
his  letter  to  Victor,  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  quoted  by 
Eusebius  (H.  E.  V.  24.  14),  he  says,  "Among 
these  were  the  presbyters  before  Soter,  who  pre- 
sided over  the  Church  which  thou  now  rulest.  We 
mean  Anicetus,  and  Pius,  and  Hyginus,  and  Tel- 
esphorus,  and  Xystus." 

Again  (Bk.  IV.  xxiv.  2).  He  says:  "It  is  in- 
cumbent to  obey  the  presbyters,  who  are  in  the 
Church,  those  who,  as  I  have  shown,have  the  suc- 
cession from  the  Apostles,  those  who,  together  with 


114  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


the  succession  of  the  Episcopate,  have  received  the 
certain  gift  of  truth."  In  Bk.  III.  ii.  2.,  he  says: 
"We  refer  them  to  that  tradition  which  originates 
from  the  Apostles,  which  is  preserved  by  means  of 
the  succession  of  presbyters  in  the  Churches." 
Then,  in  the  third  cliapter,  he  goes  on  to  demon- 
strate that  succession:  "We  are  in  a  position,"  he 
says,  "to  reckon  up  those  who  were  by  the  Apostles 
instituted  Bishops  in  the  Churches,  and  the  suc- 
cession of  those  men  to  our  own  times." 

Since  it  would  be  tedious  to  reckon  up  the  suc- 
cessions of  all  the  Churches,  "we  indicate  the  tra- 
dition derived  from  the  Apostles  of  the  Church 
organized  at  Rome  by  the  two  Apostles,  Peter  and 
Paul,  as  also  the  faith  preached  to  men,  which 
comes  down  to  our  o^\^l  time  by  means  of  the  suc- 
cession of  Bishops.  For,  to  this  Church,  on  account 
of  its  special  pre-eminence,  all  Churches  must 
needs  come  together,  and  in  her  the  Apostolic  tradi- 
tion has  been  always  preserved  by  those  who  are 
from  all  parts.  The  blessed  Apostles  then,  hav- 
ing founded  and  built  up  the  Church,  conmiitted 
into  the  hands  of  Linus  the  Episcopate.  To  him 
succeeded  Anacletus,  and,  after  him,  Clement  was 
allotted  the  Bishopric." 

And  so  he  goes  on  to  enumerate  the  succession 
of  the  Bishops  at  Rome  to  his  own  day.     The  sue- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  115 

cession  of  preshytei^s  therefore,  was,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Irenaeus,  simply  the  succession  of  Bish- 
ops. 

There  were  many  presbyters,  or  elders,  in 
Rome,  but  one  man  alone  held  among  them  the 
succession  from  the  Apostles,  as  the  ruler  of  the 
Church,  to  whom  had  been  committed  the  Episco- 
pate. 

Tertullian,  who  was  born  about  A.D.  150,  and 

became  a  Montanist,  probably  at  the  close  of  the 
second  century,  reproduces  the  argument  of 
Irenaeus,  in  his  contest  with  heresy.  He  has  two 
questions  for  the  heretic.  "Does  he  hold  the  rule 
of  faith  ?"  "Has  he  the  Apostolic  succession  ?" 
"Let  them,"  he  says,  "produce  the  origins  of  their 
churches.  Let  them  unroll  the  line  of  their  Bish- 
ops, running  down  in  such  a  way  from  the  begin- 
ning, that  their  first  Bishop  shall  have  had  for  his 
authorizer  and  predecessor  one  of  the  Apostles,  or 
of  the  Apostolic  men  who  continued  to  the  end  in 
their  fellowship.  This  is  the  way  in  which  the 
Apostolic  Churches  hand  in  their  registers,  as  the 
Church  of  the  Smyrnaeans  relates,  that  Polycarp 
was  installed  by  John.  So,  in  like  manner,  the 
rest  of  the  Churches  exhibit  the  names  of  men  ap- 
pointed to  the  Episcopate  by  the  Apostles,  whom 
they  possess  as  transmitters  of  the  Apostolic  seed" 
(Ter.  De.  Praescp.  32). 


116  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

The  unchanging  rule  of  faith  in  Tertullian's 
mind,  is  connected  with  the  steadfast  Apostolic 
succession.  While  the  lists  of  names,  which 
Irenaeus  and  Tertullian  and  others,  their  contem- 
poraries, quoted  by  Eusebius,  may  be  uncertain, 
when  they  mention  the  succession  of  the  Bishops 
of  a  particular  Church — for  they  probably  were 
handing  on  an  oral  tradition — yet  their  testimony 
establishes  these  facts:  that  the  Church  in  their 
day  possessed  a  ministry  of  three  orders;  that  it 
was  ruled  everywhere  by  Bishops ;  that  these  Bish- 
ops were  regarded  as  the  successors  of  the  Apos- 
tles; and,  in  ordaining,  confirming,  and  ruling, 
they  exercised  those  spiritual  gifts,  which  the 
Apostles  had  transmitted  to  them. 

As  they  openly  challenged  the  heretics  to  pro- 
duce the  accounts  of  the  origins  of  their  Churches, 
and  to  unroll  the  line  of  their  Bishops  in  such  a 
way,  from  the  beginning,  that  their  first  Bishop 
shall  have  had  for  his  authorizer  and  predecessor 
one  of  the  Apostles,  there  cannot  have  been,  at  that 
time,  anywhere  in  the  Church,  in  Asia,  Europe,  or 
Africa,  any  ministry  not  of  this  Apostolic  char- 
acter; nor  can  there  have  been  an-snvhere  a  tradi- 
tion,  that  there  had  been  a  period  when  the  min- 
istry was  not  Episcopal.  For  how  quickly  would 
the  heretic  have  retorted,  that  the  Episcopate  was 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  117 


not  Apostolic  in  its  origin,  if  there  was  the  faintest 
trace  of  a  tradition  that  it  was  a  usurpation  of 
powers,  originally  committed  to  the  presbyters  of 
the  Church. 

And  when  we  reflect  that  Irenaeus  was  born 
not  later  than  A.D.  130,  that  he  was  the  disciple 
of  Polycarp,  that  he  was  trained  in  the  East,  and 
exercised  his  ministry  and  died  in  the  Western 
Church,  his  opportunities  of  knowing  the  tradition 
of  the  Church,  every^vhere,  as  regards  the  origin 
and  character  of  its  ministry,  qualifies  him  to  bear 
witness  of  the  highest  value. 

He  declares  that  the  three-fold  ministry  of  the 
Church  is  Apostolic  in  its  origin,  and  that  the 
Bishops  are  the  successors  of  the  Apostles.  He 
knows  of  no  counter  tradition  anyw^here,  and  so 
confident  is  he  in  his  position,  that  he  cites  the 
Apostolic  authority  of  the  Bishops  as  the  guaran- 
tee of  the  faith  of  the  Church.  The  one,  undying 
Episcopate,  with  its  direct  descent  from  the  Apos- 
tles, was  the  assurance  of  the  permanence  of  Apos- 
tolic truth.  The  Bishop,  as  the  successor  of  the 
Apostles,  was  the  depository  of  primitive  truth, 
the  inheritor  of  Apostolic  tradition. 

Kow,  if  any  where  there  had  been  a  suspicion 
that  this  assertion  of  the  Apostolic  origin  of  the 
Episcopate  was  false;    if  there  had  been  a  time 


118  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

when  evervwliere  in  the  Church  there  had  been  a 

I.' 

usurpation,  by  one  man,  of  powers  which  hitherto 
had  belonged  to  all  the  presbyters,  and  a  denial  to 
these  men  of  the  authority  to  ordain,  to  confirm, 
and  to  rule  the  Church,  which  they  had  formerly 
possessed ;  why  had  it  left  no  trace  in  any  Christ- 
ian community  during  that  brief  interval  of  thirtv 
years  which  separated  the  last  of  the  Apostles  from 
Irenaeus  ? 

But  no  witness  of  the  second  century  rises  up 
to  call  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus  in  question. 
That  was  reserved  for  men,  safely  removed  by  the 
distance  of  ages  from  the  facts  which  they  dis- 
puted. We  may  see,  then,  how  temperate  is  the 
language  of  the  Church,  when  it  asserts  that  "it 
is  evident  unto  all  men,  diligently  reading  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  ancient  authors,  that  from  the 
Apostles'  time,  there  have  been  these  orders  of 
ministers  in  Christ's  Church:  Bishops,  Priests, 
and  Deacons." 

The  Xew  Testament  declares  that  the  twelve 
Apostles  were  the  depositories  of  Christ's  Commis- 
sion, as  the  founders,  and  governors  of  His 
Church.  At  first,  the  ministry  was  within  the 
apostolate ;  but  as  necessity  required,  that  ministry 
was  developed,  by  the  creation  of  the  orders  of 
presb}i;ers,  and  deacons,  and  the  commitment  to 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  119 

them  of  functions  of  teaching,  of  worship,  and  of 
discipline,  where  the  Apostles  could  not  personally 
act. 

These  ministers  were  always  commissioned  for 
their  work  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the 
Apostles.  As  the  work  of  the  Church  grew,  and 
time  went  on,  the  powers  lodged  with  the  Apostles 
were  delegated  to  other  men  as  their  substitutes, 
and  their  successors. 

In  Apostolic  days,  a  localized  Episcopate  be- 
gan to  take  the  place  of  the  itinerant  oversight  of 
the  Apostles,  James,  the  Lord's  brother,  becoming 
the  first  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  having  under  him 
elders,  and  deacons.  St.  Paul,  during  his  whole 
career,  as  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  ruled  the 
many  churches  he  had  founded,  reserving  to  him- 
self the  power  of  ordination  to  the  Sacred  Minis- 
trv,  and  the  riffht  to  control  with  absolute  author- 
ity.  He  maintained  his  constant  superintendence 
by  means  of  a  staff  of  some  twenty  vicars-apostolic 
attached  to  him,  who  personally  visited  the 
churches  as  he  required,  and  acted  as  his  repre- 
sentatives, and  with  his  authority.  In  his  last 
days  he  appointed  men,  so  far  as  we  have  any 
knowledge,  to  ordain,  to  rule,  and  to  watch  over  the 
churches  with  full  apostolic  jurisdiction. 
Whether    the    commission  of    these  men    for  the 


120  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

churches  to  which  they  were  sent,  was  permanent 
or  temporary,  whether  their  authority  was  that  of 
diocesan  Bishops  or  vicars-apostolic,  they  certainly 
acted  as  the  substitutes  of  the  Apostle,  and  their 
duties  were,  in  essence,  identical  with  those  of  the 
episcopate. 

So  far,  then,  as  the  Xew  Testament  is  con- 
cerned, we  are  taught  that  there  was  no  supreme 
government,  except  the  apostolic  oversight,  and  no 
principle  for  transmitting  this  is  recognized,  ex- 
cept apostolic  succession  by  laying  on  of  hands. 
St.  John,  in  the  Eevelation,  addresses  his  letters 
to  the  Angels,  or  Messengers  of  the  Churches,  as  if 
he  recognized  that  everywhere  the  Church  was 
under  Episcopal  oversight. 

Clement  alludes  to  rulers,  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons, as  the  Ministry  of  the  Church,  and  takes  it 
for  granted  that  every  presbyter  at  Corinth  had,  as 
a  matter  of  course,  been  ordained  by  an  Apostle,  or 
other  eminent  men.  The  obscure  writer  in  some 
remote  part  of  Syria  who  gives  us  his  crude  con- 
ception of  Christianity  in  the  "Teaching  of  the 
Twelve  Apostles,"  evidently  has  in  mind  a  minis- 
try similar  to  that  to  which  Clement  refers  at 
Corinth ;  a  local  ministry  of  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons, with  an  itinerant  episcopate,  exercising  occa- 
sional and  general  superintendence,  similar  to  the 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  121 

government   of   the   Asiatic   churches   under    St. 
Paul. 

About  the  time  of  St.  John's  death,  this  itiner- 
ant rule  of  apostolic  men  became  localized,  as  a 
diocesan  episcopacy ;  not  suddenly,  but  gradually, 
so  that  within  ten  or  fifteen  years  after  the  death 
of  the  last  of  the  Apostles,  Ignatius  could  speak  of 
it  as  a  settled  part  of  the  regimen  of  Church  gov- 
ernment. And  in  the  next  generation,  when  from 
the  pen  of  Hegesippus,  of  Irenaeus,  of  Tertullian, 
we  have  a  distinct  account  of  the  state  of  the 
Church,  we  find  over  all  Christendom  this  epis- 
copal form  of  Church  government,  and  the  Bish- 
ops, everywhere  acknowledged,  as  deriving  their 
authority  in  direct  succession  from  the  Apostles, 
and  exercising  by  virtue  of  the  Divine  commission 
entrusted  to  them,  full  apostolic  powers. 

From  that  far  off  past,  there  comes  no  tradi- 
tion that  this  episcopal  authority  was  a  usurpation, 
although  the  fullest  opportunity  is  given,  for  these 
writers  throw  down  the  challenge  to  the  heretics, 
that  the  Bishops  are  the  successors  of  the  Apostles. 
If  the  enemies  of  the  faith  could  have  denied  it, 
they  would  have  overturned  the  argument  of  these 
champions  of  the  Church.  But  there  was  no 
denial.  It  was  a  fact  patent  to  all  men  in  that 
age  of  the  Church. 


122  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

In  reading  the  testimony  concerning  the  early 
government  of  the  Church,  we  must  remember,  to 
quote  the  words  of  Hooker,  that  ''things  are 
ancienter  than  their  names."  We  do  not  first  coin 
a  name,  and  then  invent  a  thing  to  fit  it;  but, 
having  invented  a  new  thing,  we  try  one  title,  and 
another,  to  designate  it,  until  by  common  consent, 
we  at  length  agree  on  a  name. 

We  have  not  yet  decided  whether  the  perma- 
nent name  of  the  metal  road  is  "railroad,"  or  "rail- 
way," whether  the  railway  carriage  is  a  "car"  or  a 
"carriage,"  whether  the  stopping  place  is  a  "sta- 
tion" or  a  "depot,"  and  often  times  we  wait  a  very 
considerable  time  before  a  felicitous  designation  is 
adopted  by  the  unanimous  consent  of  men. 

So,  also,  it  was  with  the  orders  of  the  Christian 
ministry.  The  names,  apostle,  prophet,  bishop, 
presbyter,  deacon,  were  not  used  accurately,  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  among  early  ecclesiastical 
writers,  as  we  would  use  them  now  We  speak  of 
the  ordination  of  the  "seven  deacons,"  yet  the  word 
"deacon"  is  not  used  to  designate  them  in  the  I^ew 
Testament. 

St.  Paul  calls  the  Saviour  a  deacon  (Rom.  15, 
8).  He  designates  himself  and  Apollos  deacons, 
and  yet  the  deacons  mentioned  in  the  first  epistle 
to  Timothy  (I  Tim  iii)  are  beyond  doubt  an  order 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  123 

of  ministers  below  the  presbyters,  whereas  St. 
Paul  was  the  Apostle  in  absolute  authority,  over 
the  presbyters.  Of  course,  the  word  was  used  in 
the  indefinite  way,  in  which  the  term  minister  is 
now  employed,  to  designate  bishop,  priest,  or 
deacon ;   and  many  other  offices. 

So  also  the  words  bishop,  and  elder,  are  used 
indefinitely.  The  bishop  or  overseer,  was  some- 
times the  man  whose  business  it  was  to  oversee  a 
dozen  persons,  gathered  together  in  a  loft,  for  wor- 
ship, and  sometimes  the  name  was  applied  to  an 
officer,  like  Titus,  deputed  to  oversee  all  the  congre- 
gations of  the  Church,  in  a  large  island,  with  all 
their  ministers  of  all  grades,  to  ordain  these  min- 
isters, to  rebuke  them,  if  necessary,  to  try  them, 
to  depose  them. 

Peter,  also,  calls  himself  a  presbyter,  or  elder, 
and,  in  Acts  II.  17,  he  applies  the  title  to  elderly 
lay  people.  "Your  old  men,"  literally  "your  pres- 
byters," "shall  dream  dreams."  Yet  Peter  was 
surely  an  Apostle,  and  belonged  to  a  different 
class  from  those  elders  who  met  with  the  Apostles 
and  brethren  in  the  council  at  Jerusalem.  The 
presbyters,  or  elders,  of  Ephesus,  summoned  to 
meet  Paul  at  Miletus,  are  designated  by  him  bish- 
ops, or  overseers  of  the  flock;  and  on  the  other 
hand  Irenaeus  speaks  of  the  succession  of  bishops 


124  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

at  Rome  as  presbyters.  He  designates  them  in 
his  letter  to  Victor  as  "the  presbyters  ^vho  presided 
over  the  Church  which  thou  now  rulest,"  and  then 
goes  on  to  name  them,  although  he  has  no  idea 
whatever,  of  confusing  their  office  with  that  of  the 
presbyters  under  their  jurisdiction. 

Other  early  ecclesiastical  writers,  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Origen,  Firmilian,  use  the  same  in- 
determinate language  in  referring  to  the  episco- 
pate ;  for  while  the  office  was  distinct,  and  the  one 
Bishop  in  every  diocese  was  held  to  be  the  succes- 
sor of  the  Apostles,  the  name  by  which  that  office 
was  designated  had  not  vet  been  fixed  bv  that  com- 
mon  consent  and  usage  which  afterwards  obtained 
in  the  Church. 

We  could  easily  add  to  the  volume  of  the  testi- 
mony concerning  the  character  of  the  sacred  !Min- 
istrv  in  the  second  centurv.  The  Clementine  for- 
geries,  probably  the  work  of  some  unbelieving  Jew, 
and  the  nidus  from  which  was  hatched  the  Petrine 
claims,  began  some  time  about  the  year  A.  D.  150, 
and  they  take  it  for  granted,  that  episcopacy  is  the 
rule  of  government  in  the  Church,  and  that  it  de- 
rives its  succession  from  the  Apostles. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  born  about  the  middle 
of  the  second  centurv,  only  knew  of  a  Church 
which  had  a  ministry  of  bishops,  priests,  and  dea- 


The  Sacred  Ministnj.  125 


cons.  Hegesippus  was  the  personal  friend  of  the 
Bishop  of  Corinth  before  A.D.  150,  and  speaks  of 
him  as  the  latest  of  a  succession  of  bishops  there. 

But  nothing  could  be  added  to  the  positiveness 
of  the  testimony  we  have  already  considered,  that, 
by  unanimous  consent  over  all  the  world,  the 
sacred  Ministry  was  episcopal,  and  derived  its 
power  and  authority  by  direct  succession  from  the 
Apostles. 

There  is  no  record,  I  believe,  in  the  history  of 
the  early  ages  of  the  Church,  of  a  single  ordination 
by  presbyters.  A  Bampton  lecturer,  who  had  his 
limitations  as  a  defender  of  the  Faith  of  the 
Church,  inasmuch  as  he  seemed  to  denv  that  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Pastoral  epistles 
were  part  of  the  Canon  of  the  ISTew  Testament,  has 
tried  to  make  out  a  case  of  ordination  by  pres- 
byters in  the  early  ages  of  Christianity.  He  has 
told  us  of  a  presbyter-abbot  who  promoted  one  of 
his  companions  to  the  diaconate,  and  the  presbyter- 
ate.  But  when  we  read  the  account  we  find  noth- 
ing to  justify  the  assertion  that  the  abbot  ordained 
his  friend,  but  simply  that  he  used  his  influence  to 
have  him  ordained. 

Again,  he  tells  us,  that  the  presbyter  ^ovatus 
appointed  Felicessimus  deacon,  from  which  he 
infers  that  he  ordained  him.     But  Felicessimus 


126  Fundatnental  Church  Principles. 

was  not  the  only  person  appointed  to  a  holy  office 
by  ^ovatns.     He  also  appointed  a  bishop.  The 

same  expression  exactly  is  used,  Xovatns  appointed 
Xovatian  Bishop.  But  in  this  case  we  are  told 
how  he  made  the  appointment.  He  did  not  ordain 
him,  but  as  Cornelius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  writes  j 
''He  compelled  three  bishops,  boorish  and  most 
foolish  men,  to  give  him  the  episcopate  by  a  vain 
and  shadowy  imposition  of  hands."  Xo  doubt,  he 
appointed  Felicessimus  a  deacon  in  the  same  way. 

The  lecturer  also  cites  the  case  of  Colluthus,  a 
presbyter  of  Alexandria,  who  ordained  one 
Ischyras.  It  is  an  unfortunate  illustration.  For, 
in  the  first  place,  when  Calluthus  ordained  this 
man,  he  pretended  to  be  a  bishop.  In  the  second 
place,  the  ordination  was  pronounced  null  and 
void,  and  Ischyras  was  accounted  only  a  layman, 
because  the  person  who  ordained  him  was  a  pres- 
byter. 

Tavo  writers,  in  the  fourth  century,  the  un- 
known person  designated  Ambrosiaster,  and  the 
illustrious  Jerome,  have  contended  that  originally 
Christ  instituted  only  one  order  of  presbyter-bish- 
ops, and  that  it  was  the  exigency  of  Church  life, 
which  led  to  its  being  divided  into  the  episcopate, 
and  the  presbyterate,  under  apostolic  sanction. 
These  writers,  observing    that  the    names,  bishop 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  127 

and  presb\i:er,  are  used  in  the  New  Testament  to 
designate  the  same  officers,  seem  to  argue  that 
originally  the  presbyters  were  also  bishops,  and 
that  because  of  the  dangers  of  rivalry,  and  divi- 
sion, it  was  determined  that  only  one  person  in  a 
particular  church  should  have  the  authority,  and 
exercise  the  functions,  of  the  bishop,  the  rest  of  the 
clergy  receiving  the  limited  commission  Avhich  was 
void  of  authority,  to  rule,  and  to  ordain. 

The  grounds  for  the  view  taken  by  these 
writers,  are  merely  philological.  They  bring  no 
historical  proof  for  their  theory,  except  Jerome's 
assertion  regarding  the  ancient  mode  of  selecting 
a  bishop  at  Alexandria.  It  is  well  to  note,  how- 
ever, what  it  is  that  they  assert.  They  teach  that 
all  j^resbyters  were  at  first  ordained  with  episcopal 
functions,  that  they  were  bishops  in  fact,  as  well  as 
presbyters,  but  that  after  a  time,  only  one  person 
in  the  Church  was  so  ordained,  and  became  the 
bishop,  while  all  others  received  a  limited  com- 
mission, which  did  not  include  the  authority  to 
ordain,  or  confirm. 

And  they  dwell  on  the  fact,  that  all  orders  are 
in  the  bishop,  that  now,  none  but  he  can  ordain; 
that  none  of  the  clergy  who  has  not  been  ordained 
to  it,  should  take  to  himself  any  office  which  he 
knows  not  to  have  been  intrusted  to  him;  that  it 


128  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

never  was  lawful,  or  permitted,  that  an  inferior 
should  ordain  a  superior,  for  nobody  gives  what  he 
has  not  received.  Whatever  they  may  have 
thought  of  this  imaginary  order  of  presbyter-bish- 
ops, they  were  agreed  that  it  had  passed  away,  and 
that  no  authoritv  to  ordain  was  now  vested  in  the 
elders  of  the  Church. 

But  it  is  doubtful  if  Jerome  ever  imagined  that 
there  had  been  an  order  of  presbyter-bishops.  He 
was  in  a  temper,  and  ready  to  carry  an  argument 
to  any  length. 

He  wished  to  rebuke  the  deacons  of  Rome,  and 
exalt  his  own  order.  The  dignity  of  the  bishops, 
also  was  a  thorn  in  his  side.  And  so,  he  goes  on  to 
tell  how  much  greater  is  the  position  of  a  pres- 
byter, than  that  of  a  deacon,  and  to  insist  that  a 
presbyter  could  do  all  that  belonged  to  the  position 
of  the  bishop,  except  to  ordain. 

In  fact  presbyters,  and  bishops,  he  goes  on  to 
say,  practically  were  the  same,  at  first,  for  does  not 
St.  Peter  call  himself,  your  fellow-presbyter  ? 

The  argument  is  a  feeble  one.  Irenaeus  calls 
the  bishops  of  Rome,  even  Victor,  presbyters. 
But  no  one  is  so  simple  as  to  suppose  that  Victor 
was  merely  one  of  the  elders  of  the  Church  at 
Rome,  and  not  universally  recognized  as  the  one 
bishop  of  that  diocese. 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  129 


Jerome  cites,  as  his  historical  proof,  an  ancient 
custom  of  the  Church  at  Alexandria.  For  a  con- 
siderable length  of  time,  he  says,  from  the  days  of 
St.  Mark,  down  to  the  episcopate  of  Heraclas,  "the 
presbyters  of  Alexandria  used  always  to  appoint 
as  bishops  one  chosen  out  of  their  number,  and 
placed  upon  a  higher  grade;  just  as  if  an  army 
were  making  a  general,  or  deacons  were  choosing 
one  of  themselves,  whose  diligence  they  knew,  and 
calling  him  archdeacon."  "For  what,  except 
ordination,  does  a  bishop  do,  which  a  presbyter 
cannot  ?" 

The  language  is  ambiguous.  But  if  Jerome 
means,  that  no  consecration  or  ordination  was 
necessary,  to  make  a  presbyter  a  bishop,  there  is  no 
support  for  his  statement,  in  Latin,  or  Greek  liter- 
ature. 

Origen,  who  lived  in  the  days  of  Hereclas,  has 
not  a  word  to  say  of  any  such  custom,  and  Athan- 
asius,  writing  sixty  years  earlier  than  Jerome,  and 
knowing  far  more  thoroughly  the  history  of  the 
Church  in  Alexandria,  virtually  denies  that  any 
such  custom  ever  existed.  For  he  tells  us  of  the 
presbyter  CoUuthus,  who  pretended  to  be  a  bishop, 
and  ordained  one  Ischyras.  And  at  a  council  of 
Egyptian  bishops,  A.D.  340,  we  are  told  by  Athan- 
asius,  the  ordination  was  pronounced  worthless. 
Here  is  the  ancient  record : 


130  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


"How  then  is  Ischyras  a  presbyter?  Who 
appointed  him  ?  Colluthns,  was  it  not  ?  This  is  the 
only  plea  left.  But  that  Colluthns  died  a  pres- 
byter, and  that  his  every  ordination  is  invalid,  and 
all  who  were  appointed  by  him,  in  his  schism,  have 
come  out  laymen,  and  are  so  treated,  is  plain,  and 
no  person  doubts  it"     (Athan.  cont.  Arians.  12), 

If  there  had  been  any  ancient  tradition  in 
favor  of  ordination  by  presbyters,  why  did  Col- 
luthns pretend  to  be  a  bishop  wlien  he  ordained, 
and  why  does  this  Egyptian  council  declare  that  all 
his  ordinations  are  void,  and  all  his  ministers  only 
la\anen,  because  the  person  appointing  them  was 
only  a  presbyter  ? 

Jerome,  in  his  anger,  finds  no  support  there- 
fore, for  his  argument  in  the  history  of  the  Church 
at  Alexandria.  We  see  then  liow  strong  is  the 
statement  that  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles  there 
have  been  these  orders  in  Christ's  Church,  Bish- 
ops, priests,  and  deacons. 

I  pass  by  the  attacks  that  have  been  made  on 
the  validity  of  our  orders,  by  Romanists.  I 
confess  they  have  no  interest  for  me.  When  op- 
ponents can  stoop  to  lies  like  the  Xag's  Head  fable, 
in  their  desperate  effort  to  make  out  a  case,  they 
put  themselves  out  of  court.  The  reply  of  the 
English  Archbishops  to  the  late  papal  condemna- 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  131 

tion  of  our  orders,  is  final,  and  conclusive,  for  any 
fair-minded  man. 

In  considering  the  nature  of  the  Sacred  Min- 
istry, the  question  in  our  mind  should  be,  "What 
is  the  Will  of  God  ?"  WTiat  is  the  ministry  which 
He  has  appointed  in  His  Church  ?  I  think  there 
can  be  but  one  answer.  If  the  Apostles  were  act- 
ing with  Divine  authority,  and  under  Divine  guid- 
ance, if,  in  the  gradual  unfolding  of  the  ministry, 
committed  to  them,  as  necessity  required,  until  it 
assumed  the  form  of  the  three  orders,  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons,  they  were  acting  under 
Christ's  commission,  "As  My  Father  hath  sent 
Me,  even  so  send  I  you ;"  if,  in  requiring  before  a 
man  assumed  any  of  the  duties  of  this  ministry, 
that  he  should  receive  from  them,  or  from  their 
successors,  power,  and  authority,  by  the  laying  on 
of  hands  in  ordination,  they  were  guided  by  the 
Divine  will,  then  is  it  not  plain,  that  the  reunion 
of  Christendom  must  imply  the  recognition  and 
adoption  of  this  Sacred  Ministry,  which  God  has 
instituted  in  His  Church  ? 

"The  various  Presbyterian,  Congregational, 
and  Methodist  organizations,  however  worthy  of 
our  deep  regard,  have,  in  dispensing  with  the  epis- 
copal succession,  violated  a  fundamental  law  of  the 
Church's   existence.     The  acts  of   ordination,   by 


132         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


which  presbyters  in  the  sixteenth  century,  or  since 
that  time,  originated  the  ministries  of  these  soci- 
eties, were  not  authorized  by  their  commission,  and 
did  not  belong  to  the  office  of  presbyter  which  they 
had  received.  No  such  powers  were  committed  to 
them,  when  they  were  ordained.  They  assumed 
them,  and  they  did  not  possess  them. 

"It  is  not  proved,  it  is  not  probable,  there  is  no 
record,  that  any  presbyter,  in  any  age  of  the 
Church,  ever  had  the  right  to  ordain.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  absolutely  certain,  that  for  many  cen- 
turies it  had  been  understood,  beyond  all  question, 
that  only  bishops  could  ordain,  and  that  no  pres- 
byter possessed  episcopal  powers. 

"No  exceptional  dignity,  even  the  exalted  posi- 
tion of  a  presbyter-abbot,  ever  tempted  a  minister 
to  transcend  the  limitations  of  his  office.  "We  do 
not  for  a  moment  deny  that  God's  grace  has 
wrought  through  the  irregular  ministries,  which, 
with  sincere  intention,  have  striven  to  serve  our 
Lord  ;  but  we  insist  that  a  ministry  not  episcopally 
ordained  is  violating  a  fundamental  rule  of  the 
Church's  existence,  and  working  outside  the 
covenant,  where  security  is  assured.  If  this  fact 
is  accepted,  it  has  its  immediate  bearing  on  the 
obligations  of  individuals,  who  are  members  of 
religious  denominations,  devoid  of  the  Apostolic 
Ministry. 


The  Sacred  Ministry.  133 


"But  it  also  should  appeal  to  non-episcopal 
Christian  Societies.  The  Christian  experience  of 
these  societies  may  abundantly  testify  that  the 
grace  of  God  has  wrought  effectually  among  them, 
and  they  may  be  able  to  show  plainly,  that  their 
present  position  has  been  forced  upon  them  by  the 
unhappy  necessities  of  the  past.  But  it  is  their 
evident  duty  to  face  the  problems  of  the  present, 
and  of  the  future.  They  are  confronted  with  the 
fact,  that  a  divided  Christendom  is  an  intolerable 
reproach  to  the  disciples  of  our  Eedeemer,  and  that 
its  results  have  been  disastrous  to  the  interests  of 
true  religion."* 

We  are  bound  to  seek  organic  unity,  that  the 
will  of  Christ  may  be  accomplished;  and  the 
results  of  past  experience  plainly  testify  that  there 
is  something  fundamentally  wrong  in  the  old  con- 
ceptions of  Christian  liberty,  and  in  the  sacredness 
of  individualism.  New  moral  and  doctrinal 
perils  urge  us,  at  the  same  time,  to  reconsider  the 
basis  of  Christian  life,  and  order.  And  the  first 
step  in  this  inquiry  should  be,  "What  is  God's  will 
with  regard  to  the  Christian  ministry?"  I  think 
there  can  be  but  one  answer:    The  apostolic  suc- 

*  The  passage  in  quotation  marks  is  partly  from  Canon 
Gore,  but  as  it  is  not  his  wording  exactly  I  do  not  like  to 
make  him  responsible  for  it,  so  it  seems  best  to  insert  the 
quotation  marks  but  not  specify  the  source. 


134  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


cession  of  bishops,  and  priests,  and  deacons,  is  the 
ministry  He  has  appointed  for  the  edification  of 
His  Church. 

This  Sacred  Ministry  embodies  the  historical 
continuity  of  the  Church,  and  affords  a  practical 
basis  of  union. 

It  is  the  one  ministry  which  the  Churches 
possessing  it  cannot  be  asked  to  abandon ;  for  it  is, 
with  them,  not  one  merely  of  many  permissible 
forms  of  Church  regimen,  but  the  Will  of  God,  for 
the  government,  and  edification  of  His  Church. 

It,  alone,  expresses  the  mind  of  Christ  regard- 
ing a  universal  spiritual  society,  in  which  the 
apostolic  succession  of  bishops  constitutes,  by 
Divine  appointment,  a  visible  link,  from  genera- 
tion to  generation. 

It,  alone,  witnesses  to  that  real  spiritual  con- 
tinuity, from  age  to  age,  and  from  century  to  cen- 
tury, and  holds  and  hands  on  the  authoritative 
benediction ;  "As  My  Father  hath  sent  Me,  so  send 
I  you."  "Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world." 


IV. 

Cbe  Tnacpcndencc  of  national  gburcbes. 

"Stand  fast,  therefore,  in  the  libei-ty  ivherewith  Christ  hath 
made  us  free.''     Gal.  v.  1. 

TX  the  Preface  of  the  Prayer  Book  of  our 
Mother  Church,  under  the  heading,  "Of  Cere- 
monies: Why  Some  be  Abolished  and  Some  Re- 
rained,"  we  find  this  weighty  utterance : 

"And  in  these  our  doings  we  condemn  no  other 
Xations,  nor  prescribe  anything  but  to  our  o\\ti 
people  only ;  for  we  think  it  convenient,  that  every 
Countrv  should  use  such  ceremonies  as  thev  shall 
think  best,  to  the  setting  forth  of  God's  honor  and 
glory,  and  to  the  reducing  of  the  people  to  a  most 
perfect,  and  godly  living,  without  error  or  super- 
stition ;  and  that  they  should  put  away  other 
things,  which,  from  time  to  time,  they  perceive  to 


136         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

be   most   abused,    as   in   men's   ordinances   it   of- 
ten chanceth  diversely,  in  divers  countries." 

In  this  spirit  the  oflScial  work  of  the  reforma- 
tion of  the  Church  of  England  was  conducted. 
Recognizing  the  right,  which  a  National  Church 
possessed,  to  make  such  changes  as  may  be  ex- 
pedient, subject  to  the  strict  observance  of  Catholic 
essentials,  English  Churchmen  proceeded  to  act  on 
it;  but  they  also  recognized  it,  for  other  Churches 
as  well  as  for  that  of  England,  and  claimed  to  be 
the  advocates  of  change  and  reconstruction,  only 
within  the  bounds  of  their  legitimate  jurisdiction. 
This  independence  of  Xational  Churches,  is  one  of 
our  fundamental  principles.  The  principle  is  thus 
stated  by  a  distinguished  scholar : 

"A  National  Church,  through  the  medium  of 
its  representative  synod,  duly  convened,  has  inher- 
ent authority,  from  its  Divine  Founder,  to  remove 
every  species  of  abuse,  whether  of  doctrine,  or  dis- 
cipline, existing  within  its  own  jurisdiction;  nay 
is  absolutely  boimd  by  its  allegiance  to  Christ,  and 
its  regard  for  the  people  committed  to  its  charge,  to 
vindicate,  and  extend  the  truths  of  the  Gospel,  as 
once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints,  and  taught  in 
the  early  Church." 

It  is  unnecessary  to  say,  that  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  fully  accepts  this  principle  of 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      137 

the  Church  of  England,  and  acts  on  it.  In  the 
Preface  of  onr  Prayer  Book  it  is  counted  ^'a  most 
invaluable  part  of  that  blessed  liberty,  wherewith 
Christ  hath  made  us  free,  that  in  His  Worship 
different  forms,  or  usages,  may  without  offence  be 
allowed,  provided  the  substance  of  the  Faith  be 
kept  entire ;  and  that  in  every  Church,  what  cannot 
be  clearly  determined  to  belong  to  doctrine,  must 
be  referred  to  discipline,  and  therefore,  by  com- 
mon consent,  and  authority,  may  be  altered, 
abridged,  enlarged,  amended,  or  otherwise  dis- 
posed of,  as  may  seem  most  convenient,  for  the  edi- 
fication of  the  people,  according  to  the  various 
exigencies  of  times,  and  occasions." 

It  has  been  contended,  that  a  National  Church, 
in  regulating  its  doctrines  and  discipline  privately 
and  apart ,  without  considering  the  doctrine  of  the 
rest  of  the  Church  (to  quote  the  words  of  Bossuet), 
"separates  itself  from  the  Universal  Church,  and 
renounces  the  unity  of  faith,  and  doctrine." 

But  the  criticism  will  not  stand  the  test  of 
history.  For  it  is  admitted  by  all  men,  that  pro- 
vincial and  national  synods  have,  by  immemorial 
practice  of  the  Catholic  Church,  the  right  to  con- 
demn errors,  and  heresies,  and  to  correct  abuses  in 
particular  churches.  They  have  been  considered 
perfectly  competent  to  discuss,  and  take  action,  in 


138  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

all  these  matters  of  doctrine,  and  discipline,  with 
due  regard  to  the  traditions  of  the  Universal 
Church.  The  rights  of  provincial  synods,  to  make 
decrees,  in  causes  of  faith,  and  in  cases  of  reforma- 
tion, where  corruptions  had  crept  into  the  Sacra- 
ments of  Christ,  were  freely  allowed,  and  acted  on, 
more  than  a  thousand  years  ago. 

Paul  of  Samosata,  Sabellius,  Arius,  Apollin- 
aris,  the  Donatists,  the  Pelagians,  were  all  con- 
demned by  provincial  synods,  in  the  first  instance. 
A    provincial    council    at  Rome    A.D.  348,  con- 
demned the  Sabellian  heresy.     A  provincial  coun- 
cil at  Carthage,  A.D.  348,  condemned  rebaptiza- 
tion.     A  provincial  council  at  Aquileia,  A.D.  381, 
condemned  Palladius  for  his  Arian  heresy.     An 
African  council,  A.D.  416,  condemned  Pelagian- 
ism.     Another  African  council,  A.D.  424,  decreed 
the  belief  and  preaching  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity.    At  Orange,  a  provincial  council  handled 
the  great  controversies  of  grace  and  free  will.    The 
fourth  council  of  Toledo  actually  added  to  the 
Creed.     Xot  only  did  Bishops,  in  national  and 
provincial  councils,  reform  the  particular  churches 
under  their  care;  but  asserted  that  it  was  their 
duty  to  do  so. 

The  fourth  council  of  Toledo  decreed  that  if 
there  happen  a  cause  of  faith  to  be  settled,  a  gen- 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      139 


eral  synod  of  Spain  and  Gaul  should  take  action 
thereon. 

That  which  had  been  so  often  practised  in 
many  places,  with  the  consent  of  the  whole 
Church,  is  surely  allowable,  also,  to  a  national 
council,  of  the  Church  in  England,  or  in  America. 
But  it  has  been  objected,  that  these  churches  never 
acted  without  regard  to  the  Faith  of  the  Church, 
and  sent  their  decrees  to  other  Churches  for  con- 
firmation. To  which  we  may  truly  reply,  that  our 
Church  has  been  more  scrupulous  regarding  the 
Faith  of  the  Church  at  large,  than  any  other ;  and 
has  never  made  any  reformation  in  doctrine,  with- 
out the  fullest  reference  to  the  authority,  and 
usage,  of  the  Universal  or  Catholic  Church. 

It  was  the  essential  principle  of  the  English 
Reformation  throughout,  that  the  doctrines  and 
traditions  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ  in  all 
ages  were  to  be  obediently  followed.  Even  Par- 
liament, when  it  suppressed  the  Papal  jurisdiction, 
A.D.  1533,  declared,  that  it  was  not  intended  to 
vary  from  Christ's  Church  about  the  articles  of  the 
Catholic  faith  of  Christendom. 

The  Church  of  England,  A.D.  1543,  declared 
the  Unity  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  consist, 
chiefly,  in  unity  of  doctrine,  and  that  particular 
Churches  ought  not  to  vary  from  one  another  in 
the  said  doctrine. 


140  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  declared :  "1  in- 
tend to  speak  nothing  against  One,  Holy,  Catholic 
and  Apostolical  Church,  or  the  authority  thereof, 
the  which  authority  I  have  in  great  reverence,  and 
to  which  my  mind  is  in  all  things  to  obey." 

The  Church,  then,  when  acting  with  national 
independence  it  made  such  reforms  in  doctrine  and 
discipline  as  seemed  necessary,  did  not  act  without 
duly  considering  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  in  all 
ages.  The  examples  of  ancient  councils  prove  that 
it  was  not  necessarv  to  wait  for  the  reformation  of 
errors  and  abuses,  until  the  judgment  of  the  exist- 
ing universal  Church  could  be  made  kno^vn,  by 
means  of  an  (Ecumenical  Council.  If,  after 
taking  action,  the  National  Church  did  not  send 
its  decrees  to  other  churches,  for  their  approbation, 
it  was  simply  because  this  discipline  had  long 
become  obsolete ;  and  brotherly  intercourse  with 
other  Churches  had,  by  their  act,  been  interrupted. 

In  the  assertion  of  its  national  independence, 
the  Church  of  England  entered  into  no  contest 
about  the  Faith.  "When  the  Church  in  the  16th 
century  asserted  its  independence,  it  was  a  ques- 
tion, not  of  doctrine,  but  of  money.  The  primacy 
of  order,  which  had  been  freely  and  justly  ac- 
corded to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  had  developed 
gradually  into  a  supremacy  of  power,  and  under 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      141 

the  irritation  of  these  constantly  increasing  en- 
croachments on  their  liberties,  English  Churchmen 
earnestly  protested.  From  the  time  of  the  dispute 
on  the  subject  of  investitures,  in  the  days  of 
Anselm,  when  the  King,  and  his  nobles,  the  bish- 
ops, also,  and  others  of  inferior  rank,  were  so  in- 
dignant as  to  assert  that  rather  than  surrender  the 
privileges  of  their  forefathers,  they  would  depart 
from  the  Roman  Church,  down  to  the  final  strug- 
gle of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  encroachments  of 
the  Roman  See  called  forth  spirited  opposition, 
which  may  be  seen  in  the  civil  enactments  to  repel 
papal  aggression,  and  preserve  the  liberties  of  the 
Church. 

The  aggressions  were  made  up  of  these  particu- 
lars: 

A  judicial  power  was  claimed  by  Rome  in  mat- 
ters ecclesiastical,  or  cases  of  appeal. 

Power  was  claimed  to  grant  licenses,  and  dis- 
pensations. 

Liberty  was  asserted,  to  send  legates  into  Eng- 
land, and  hold  legatine  courts  there.  The  right 
was  claimed,  and  exercised,  to  grant  investiture  to 
bishops,  to  confirm  episcopal  elections,  and  to  dis- 
tribute ecclesiastical  patronage. 

The  privilege  was  claimed,  of  receiving  first 
fruits,  the  tenths  of  English  benefices,  and  the 
goods  of  the  clergy  who  died  intestate. 


14-2  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

It  was  an  attractive  scheme  of  plunder,  under 
which  tlie  court  of  the  bishop  of  Eome  could  live 
in  splendor,  at  the  expense  of  the  rest  of  Europe. 
No  portion  of  the  field  had  coTitributed  so  largely, 
to  this  ffolden  harvest,  as  the  Church  of  England. 

And  the  crime  of  the  Church  of  England, 
against  the  papacy,  was  that  it  refused  to  be  plun- 
dered any  longer. 

No  attempt  was  made  to  dispute  the  i)riniacy 
of  the  Roman  See  in  the  Catholic  Church ;  no 
effort  to  deprive  the  Pope  of  any  really  spiritual 
power,  or  to  question  his  right  to  summon  a  general 
council,  to  define  questions  of  faith ;  or  to  act  as 
the  centre  of  Catholic  unity.  No,  the  attack  was 
of  a  verv  different  kind. 

On  petition  of  the  clergy,  the  temporal  power 
passed  certain  acts,  concerning  Annates,  Bulls, 
Appeals,  and  Dispensations. 

The  English  Parliament,  A.D.  1532,  decreed 
that  all  first  fruits,  as  annates,  and  other  payments 
to  the  Roman  See,  for  pensions  and  annuities, 
should  cease.  There  was,  surely,  no  schism,  or  her- 
esy in  the  suppression  of  these  taxes,  which  were  of 
comparatively  recent  obligation,  dating  from  the 
fourteenth  century,  and  which,  over  and  over  again, 
have  been  suppressed  in  other  national  churches, 
like  that  of  France,  or  of  Austria.     Pensions  be- 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      143 

gan  to  be  fixed  on  benefices,  by  the  popes,  for  the 
benefit  of  cardinals,  and  other  members  of  the 
Roman  court,  about  the  time  that  the  first-fruits 
device  was  invented ;  but  it  was  idle  to  say  that 
there  was  religious  obligation  to  continue  these 
exactions.  The  same  law,  which  withdrew  the 
annates  from  the  grasp  of  the  Pope,  vested  them  in 
the  King,  and  they  remained  part  of  the  royal 
revenues,  until  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  when 
they  were  restored  to  the  Church,  and  appropriated 
for  the  augmentation  of  poor  livings,  under  the 
designation  ^'Queen  Anne's  Bounty." 

It  was  also  enacted,  A.D.  1532,  that  there 
should  be  no  more  money  paid  for  bulls,  or  papal 
letters  of  institution  to  bishoprics ;  and  that,  if 
these  bulls  were  refused,  the  bishop-elect  was  to  be 
consecrated  in  England,  without  them.  In  the 
following  year  the  necessity  of  any  bulls,  briefs,  or 
palls  from  Rome,  was  dispensed  with,  utterly. 

This  was  a  very  righteous  law.  The  necessity 
of  papal  bulls,  was  founded  on  the  laws  of  the 
Roman  pontiffs,  collected  by  Gregory  the  9th  in 
the  Decretals.  It  was  a  modern  innovation,  for 
as  late  as  A.D.  1373,  English  bishops  were  con- 
firmed, and  ordained  by  their  metropolitans,  and 
not  by  papal  bulls.  The  custom  of  obtaining 
bulls,  for  newly  elected  bishops,  rose  entirely  from 


144  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

the  papal  reservations,  and  usurpations  of  patron- 
age, during  the  great  Western  schism,  and  they 
were  continued  afterwards,  by  concordats  between 
sovereigns  and  the  Roman  See,  who  divided  the 
plunder  of  the  Church  between  them. 

That  these  Bulls  may  be  freely  dispensed  with, 
by  the  authority  of  national  Churches,  is  an  evi- 
dent fact.  The  Synod  of  Ems,  in  Germany,  A.D. 
1785,  declared  that  if  the  papacy  refused  to  con- 
firm the  bishops,  they  would  find  resources  in  the 
ancient  discipline. 

The  commission  of  cardinals,  archbishops, 
and  bishops,  instituted  by  Xapoleon,  A.D.  1811, 
acknowledged  that  a  National  Council  of  France, 
could  order  that  bishops  should  be  instituted  by  the 
metropolitan,  or  senior  bishop,  instead  of  the 
Pope,  in  urgent  circumstances.  And  when  the 
Roman  bishop  refused  to  institute  bishops  in  Por- 
tugal, the  Portuguese  applied  to  the  Gallican 
Church,  to  intercede  with  the  pontiff  on  their  be- 
half, and,  in  case  of  failure,  to  consecrate  their 
bishops.  And,  accordingly,  the  Gallican  bishops 
intimated  to  the  Roman  bishop,  that,  in  case  of  his 
continued  refusal,  they  would  supply  his  defect, 
and  consecrate  the  Portuguese  bishops. 

The  necessity  of  obtaining  a  pall  from  Rome, 
before    metropolitan    jurisdiction    could    be  exer- 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      145 

cised,  was  founded  on  the  spurious  decretals,  to 
which  Gregory  7th  and  the  succeeding  bishops  of 
Rome  appealed,  in  justification  of  their  claims,  on 
this  point. 

The  pall  was  at  first  given  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  as  a  compliment,  an  external  ensign 
of  honor ;  and  it  conferred  on  him  no  greater  power 
than  he,  and  his  predecessors,  had  always  exer- 
cised. Only  by  its  own  consent,  and  permission, 
could  this  figment,  regarding  the  necessity  of  the 
pall,  exist  in  the  National  Church  of  England; 
and,  when  that  permission  was  withdrawn,  the 
claim  went  with  it. 

In  the  year  1532,  it  was  enacted,  that  all  causes 
concerning  wills,  matrimony,  divorce,  tithes,  obla- 
tions, etc.,  should  be  determined  within  the  realm 
of  England,  by  the  proper  ecclesiastical  tribunals ; 
and  that  no  appeals  should  be  made  to  the  bishop 
of  Rome.  Similar  action  had  often  been  taken  by 
^National  Churches. 

The  African  Church  prohibited,  expressly,  all 
appeals  to  Rome.  The  grand  duke  of  Tuscany, 
and  the  King  of  Xaples,  prohibited  appeals.  In 
Austria,  France,  and  Spain,  no  appeal  was 
allowed,  except  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  a  re- 
hearing of  the  case,  within  these  countries ;  a  very 
different  thing  from  sending  the  case  to  a  Roman 


146  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


tribunal.  The  privilege  of  hearing  appeals  was  a 
favor  granted  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  which  the 
National  Church  of  England  had  a  perfect  right  to 
withdraw  at  pleasure. 

In  the  vear  1533,  it  was  also  enacted  that  no 
one,  in  England,  should  hereafter  sue  to  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  for  dispensations,  and  licenses.  Origin- 
ally, all  bishops  had  granted  these;  but,  from  the 
tenth  century  onward,  the  right  to  do  so  had  been 
gradually  usurped  by  the  Roman  pontiffs;  and  the 
facility  with  which  they  were  granted,  for  a 
pecuniary  consideration,  had  told  heavily  against 
the  discipline  of  the  Church.  The  evils  arising 
from  this  abuse  afforded  a  sufficient  reason  for  the 
limitation  of  the  powers  of  dispensation  to  English 
bishops,  who  would  naturally  feel  more  deeply 
interested  in  the  preservation  of  discipline  among 
their  own  people,  than  the  Roman  Court,  which 
viewed  this  power,  chiefly  as  a  means  of  sup- 
plying its  pecuniary  necessities.  Papal  dispensa- 
tions have  frequently  been  abolished  by  national 
churches ;    in  Austria,  for  illustration. 

These  were  the  changes  made  by  the  Church 
of  England,  which  caused  the  break  with  the 
Roman  See.  These  measures  made  no  change  in 
the  Eaith,  and  interfered  with  no  privilege,  which 
belonged  to  the  Roman  See,  either  by  primitive 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      147 

custom,  or  by  any  grant  of  an  Qi^cumenical  Coun- 
cil. 

The  bishops,  and  clergy,  of  the  two  convoca- 
tions, when  the  question  was  propounded  to  them, 
"Whether  the  bishop  of  Rome  has  in  the  Word  of 
God  any  greater  jurisdiction  in  the  realm  of  Eng- 
land, than  any  other  foreign  bishop,"  determined 
that  he  had  not.  The  Universities,  the  Chapters, 
the  Convents  of  regulars,  Mendicants,  etc.,  also 
declared  their  assent,  only  one  bishop,  Fisher  of 
Rochester,  dissenting.  All  the  branches  of  the 
jurisdiction,  thus  abolished,  had  risen,  one  by  one, 
ages  after  the  foundation  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, either  by  permission  of  that  Church,  or  by 
deliberate  usurpation ;  and  there  could  be  no  obli- 
gation to  continue  these  privileges  to  the  Roman 
See  longer  than  seemed  expedient. 

In  assuming  its  national  rights,  our  Mother 
Church  did  not,  in  fact,  or  in  intention,  separate 
itself  from  the  Communion  of  the  rest  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  It  excommunicated  no  other 
Churches,  and  none  of  their  clergy  or  people  were 
ever  refused  Christian  Communion,  or  intercourse, 
by  the  Church  of  England.  It  did  not  fail  to 
recognize  them  as  Churches  of  Christ  and  to 
acknowledge  that  it  was  the  duty  of  Christians  to 
remain  united  to  them. 


148         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

In  the  institution  of  a  Christian  man,  A.D. 
1537,  approved  by  twenty-one  archbishops  and 
bishops  of  the  Church  of  England,  years  after  the 
papal  jurisdiction  had  been  abolished,  the  follow- 
ing passage  is  to  be  found :  "I  do  believe  that  the 
Church  of  Rome  is  not,  and  cannot  worthily  be 
called,  the  Catholic  Church,  but  only  a  particular 
member  thereof;  and  cannot  challenge,  or  vindi- 
cate of  right,  and  by  the  Word  of  God,  to  be  head 
of  this  Universal  Church,  or  to  have  any  authority 
over  the  other  Churches  of  Christ,  which  be  in  Eng- 
land, France,  Spain  or  any  other  realm.  And  I 
believe,  also,  that  the  said  Church  of  Eome,  with 
all  the  other  particular  Churches  in  the  world, 
compacted,  and  united  together,  do  make  and  con- 
stitute but  one  Catholic  Church." 

Again,  A.D.  1543,  in  the  "Necessary  Doc- 
trine" approved  by  the  English  bishops,  all  the 
other  Western  Churches  are  acknowledged,  as 
parts  of  one  Catholic  Church ;  and  the  faithful  in 
every  coimtry  are  exhorted  to  obey  them. 

It  is  obvious,  therefore,  that  in  asserting  its 
independence  of  the  usurpations  of  the  Roman 
bishop,  and  in  denying  his  right  to  meddle  with 
English  causes,  or  to  plunder  English  Sees  under 
forms  of  law,  there  was  no  desire  to  separate  from 
the  Communion  of  other  Western  Churches. 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      149 

The  origin  of  the  Roman  jurisdiction  over  par- 
ticnlar  Churches,  was  an  unholy  thing.  Use  was 
made  of  forgeries  to  establish  this  jurisdiction, 
and  one  usurpation  of  authority  followed  another, 
the  aim  being  almost  always  a  sordid  one;  to 
gratify  avarice,  or  the  lust  of  worldly  power.  The 
principle  of  obedience  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  as 
the  test  of  Catholic  unity,  was  a  principle  tending 
to  schism.  It  divided  the  Western  from  the 
Eastern  Churches,  and  separated  the  Church  of 
England  from  the  other  National  Churches  of 
Europe. 

But  the  act  of  separation  was  the  work  of  the 
Roman  bishop.  Despising  fraternal  unity,  he 
condemned  the  Church  of  England  as  schismatical 
and  heretical,  because  it  suppressed  his  jurisdic- 
tion, which  he  had  either  illegally  usurped,  or  had 
received  as  a  privilege,  which  of  course  could  be 
withdra\vn  at  pleasure.  He,  and  those  who  sided 
with  him,  were  guilty  of  the  sin  of  schism,  and  he 
aggravated  his  sin  by  sending  missionaries  to  Eng- 
land, to  excite  divisions  in  the  Church,  and  with- 
draw the  people  from  obedience  to  their  pastors. 
He  set  up  altar  against  altar,  in  this  ancient 
Church,  which  once  had  been  looked  upon  as  a 
world  beyond  the  sea,  entitled  to  its  own  Caesar, 
and  to  its  own  pontiff. 


150  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Pope  Urban  tells  Archbishop  Anselm  that  he 
is  "Alterius  orbis  Apostoliciim  et  Patriarchum ;" 
or,  to  quote  the  words  of  William  of  Malesburv 
"Alterius  orbis  papam."  And  another  writer 
designates  Lanfranc,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
as  ^'gentium  trans-niarinornm  snmmns  Pontifex." 
Into  this  ancient  Church  the  Roman  bishop  sent 
his  emissaries  to  encourage  schism,  and  withdraw 
men  from  tlieir  obedience  to  the  Catholic  Church 
of  England.  And  the  sect  thus  formed,  he  recog- 
nized as  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  gave  it  bishops 
and  pastors. 

From  the  year  1533,  when  the  papal  jurisdic- 
tion was  abolished,  down  to  the  eleventh  vear  of 
the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  all  people  in  England  were 
subject  to  the  same  pastors,  attended  the  same 
churches,  and  received  the  same  sacraments.  It 
was  only  about  the  year  1570,  that  the  Romish 
party,  instigated  by  foreign  emissaries,  separated 
itself,  and  fell  from  the  communion  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church  of  England. 

Sir  E.  Coke,  at  the  trial  of  the  Jesuit  Garnet, 
declared  that  until,  in  the  eleventh  year  of  her 
reign,  the  Queen  was  excommunicated,  and  de- 
posed by  the  Pope,  and  all  persons  cursed  who 
should  obey  her,  there  were  no  popish  recusants 
in    England;    but     thereupon,    they     refused     to 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      151 

assemble  in  our  churches,  not  for  conscience  of 
anything  there  done,  against  which  they  might 
justly  except  out  of  God's  Word,  but  because  the 
Pope  had  excommunicated,  and  deposed  the 
Queen,  and  cursed  those  who  should  obey  her. 
The  prisoner  admitted,  that  most  Catholics  did 
indeed  go  to  church  before  this  date. 

This  separation  from  the  Church,  in  the  year 
1570,  was  commented  on,  by  all  men,  as  a  thing 
unprecedented,  and  strange.  What  shall  we  say 
of  a  society,  thus  formed,  or  of  the  instigator  of 
this  separation  from  the  Church  of  Christ?  The 
whole  separation,  or  schism,  was  originated  and 
effected  by  the  Roman  pontiffs,  and  their  adher- 
ents. We  did  not  go  out  from  them,  but,  as  the 
Apostle  says,  "They  went  out  from  us." 

In  asserting  its  independence,  the  national 
Church  of  England  took  its  stand  on  the  fact,  that 
all  bishops  of  Rome,  when  they  are  consecrated, 
and  made  bishops  of  that  See,  do  make  a  solemn 
profession,  and  vow,  that  they  will  inviolably  ob- 
serve, and  keep,  all  the  ordinances  made  in  the 
first  eight  general  councils ;  among  which  it  is  spe- 
cially provided,  and  enacted,  that  all  causes  shall 
be  finished,  and  determined  within  the  province 
where  the  same  be  begun,  and  that  by  the  bishops 
of  the  same  province ;    and  that  no  bishop  shall 


152         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

exercise  jurisdiction  out  of  his  own  diocese  or 
province. 

When,  presently,  the  Church  followed  its  asser- 
tion of  independence  in  its  own  internal  affairs,  by 
taking  order  with  regard  to  rites  and  ceremonies, 
and  in  defining  doctrine,  and  questions  of  faith 
and  worship,  its  aim  was  to  regain  for  the  English 
nation,  the  pure  and  practical  elements  of  the 
Faith  which  in  the  middle  ages  had  been  obscured, 
distorted,  or  denied,  by  the  dominant  class  of 
schoolmen. 

To  quote  the  words  of  a  memorable  document, 
of  that  age:  "This  pure  doctrine  of  the  gospel, 
which  we  have  embraced,  is  without  doubt,  the 
very  consent  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  as 
the  testimonies  of  the  old  Church,  and  of  the  holy 
fathers,  do  evidently  declare.  For  we  do  not 
receive,  or  approve,  any  wicked  opinions,  or  such 
as  fight  against  the  consent  of  the  holy  fathers. 
Yea,  rather,  in  many  articles  we  do  renew  the 
teachings  of  the  old  synods,  and  fathers,  which  the 
latter  age  had  put  out  of  the  way,  and  for  them  had 
given  forth  other  false  and  counterfeit  doctrines, 
with  the  which  our  adversaries  do  shamefully 
fight,  with  the  judgments  of  the  fathers,  and 
authority  of  the  Synods." 

In  using  the  term  "National  Church,"  we  must 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      153 

remember  that  it  by  no  means  implies,  that  the 
boundaries  of  a  civil  government  shall  necessarily 
limit  the  jurisdiction  of  a  National  or  provincial 
church.  Sometimes  an  independent  provincial 
church  has  only  included  one  or  two  provinces  of 
an  Empire,  sometimes,  it  seems  to  have  included 
two  or  three  countries,  practically  independent  of 
each  other  in  civil  affairs. 

In  speaking  of  the  National  Churches  of 
Europe,  the  Necessary  Doctrine  goes  on  to  mention 
some  of  the  particulars  which  render  independence 
necessary.  These  are:  "distance  of  place," 
"diversity  of  traditions,"  "not  in  all  things  unity 
of  opinions,"  "alteration  of  rites,  ceremonies,  and 
ordinances,  or  estimation  of  the  same,  as  one 
church  doth,  peradventure,  esteem  their  rites, 
traditions,  laws,  ordinances,  and  ceremonies  to  be 
of  more  force,  and  efficacy,  than  another  church 
doth  esteem  the  same." 

It  is  added,  that  "these  particular  churches, 
with  local  diversities,  are  members  of  the  whole 
Catholic  Church,  and  each,  by  itself, worthy  to  be 
called  a  Catholic  Church,  when  it  professes,  and 
teaches  the  faith  and  religion  of  Christ  according 
to  Scripture,  and  the  Apostolic  doctrine.  And  so 
every  Christian  man  ought  to  honor,  give  credence. 


154  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

and  follow  the  particular  Church,  of  that  region 
wherein  he  is  born,  or  inhabited." 

It  follows,  therefore,  that  where  there  is  prac- 
tical unanimity  in  the  traditions,  opinions,  rites, 
ceremonies,  and  ordinances,  or  estimation  of  the 
same,  and  where  distance  of  place  does  not  pre- 
vent, particular  churches  may  be  united  in  one 
province,  irrespective  of  civil  divisions.  The 
genius  of  a  people,  its  ideals,  its  civilization,  its 
ambitions,  have  a  great  deal  to  do,  in  determining 
the  boundaries  of  provincial  churches. 

The  Spanish  and  Gallican  Churches,  minister- 
ing to  portions  of  the  Latin  race,  could  easily 
unite,  as  they  have  done  in  the  past.  But  the  Gal- 
lican and  German  Churches  were  compelled,  by 
race  differences,  to  follow  different  paths.  And 
where  a  people  is  essentially  one,  in  all  that  goes 
to  make  up  its  civilization,  although  it  may  exist 
under  several  independent  civil  governments,  it 
should,  as  a  Church,  be  one. 

It  seems  intolerable  that  the  unity  of  a  national 
Church,  should  be  dependent  on  the  freaks  of  poli- 
tics. When  civil  war  broke  out  in  our  country, 
was  the  American  Church  divided  ?  When  peace 
came,  did  two  independent  national  Churches 
again  become  one  ?  It  seems  to  me,  that  a  truer 
interpretation    of    facts    would    insist    that    the 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      155 

Church  remained  one,  no  matter  how  terrible 
might  be  the  disruption  of  the  state. 

Or,  again :  Canada  is  part  of  the  British  Em- 
pire, but  practically  it  is  an  independent  country, 
completely  controlling  its  own  affairs,  and  levying 
taxes  on  Commerce  from  Great  Britain,  as  really 
as  if  it  were  imported  from  Russia.  But,  in  a 
very  real  sense,  the  Canadian  Church  is  a  portion 
of  the  great  Anglican  Communion,  independent  in 
its  ovm  affairs,  yet  preserving  an  absolute  identity 
of  traditions,  opinions,  rites,  ceremonies,  and 
ordinances,  with  the  Church  of  England;  and 
sharing  in  all  the  missionary  activities  of  that 
great  Communion.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the 
Church  in  Australia,  South  Africa,  and  other  por- 
tions of  the  world. 

Wherever  our  Anglo-Saxon  civilization  has 
penetrated,  we  find  substantially  the  same  com- 
munities of  men,  with  the  same  ambitions,  the 
same  ideals,  the  same  rules  of  morality,  the  same 
passion  for  freedom  and  righteousness,  the  same 
scorn  of  tyranny,  the  same  reverence  for  law. 
And  everywhere,  our  National  Church,  which  as- 
serted its  rights  to  its  ancient  liberties  in  the 
Sixteenth  Century,  is  to  be  found,  with  identity  of 
traditions,  opinions,  rites,  ceremonies,  and  ordi- 
nances. 


156  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


Ought  we  not  to  recognize  that  fact,  and  act  on 
it  more  freely?  The  civil  lines  that  separate  one 
portion  of  our  race  from  another,  are  growing 
fainter,  and  possibly  under  the  influence  of  a  more 
enlightened  civilization  will  practically  disappear ; 
so  that,  wherever  the  English-speaking  race  is  to 
be  found,  it  will,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  be 
one;  and  the  barriers  that  have  separated  the 
great  family,  will  be  flung  on  the  dust  heaps  of  the 
barbarisms  of  the  past. 

Ought  not  the  Church  of  the  English-speaking 
race  to  anticipate,  and  show  the  way,  to  that  union 
of  hearts,  by  a  closer  organic  union,  which  shall 
enable  it  to  concentrate  its  energies  more  effec- 
tually, in  its  warfare  with  evil,  and  in  its  effort  to 
extend  the  Kingdom  of  Christ  throughout  the 
habitable  earth?  Why  should  not  the  Church  in 
Canada,  and  in  the  United  States  be  one,  with  one 
general  Convention,  or  Synod,  one  House  of  Bish- 
ops, one  field  of  missionary  activity,  controlled  by 
one  policy  ? 

And,  from  such  a  beginning,  organic  union, 
disregarding  mere  civil  lines,  might  grow,  until 
our  whole  communion,  under  the  primacy  of 
Canterbury,  could  be  gathered  in  one  great  provin- 
cial, or  national  Church. 

Think  what  it  would  be,  if  all  the  missionary 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      157 

work  of  the  Anglican  Communion  throughout  the 
world  were  our  mission  work;  if  all  our  sympa- 
thies could  be  quickened  by  the  consciousness,  that, 
wherever  our  race  was  represented,  there  the  whole 
Church  was  represented,  with  all  the  power 
of  our  great  Communion  behind  it,  to  animate 
its  zeal,  and  stimulate  its  effort,  and,  with  the 
steadying  guidance  of  the  voice  of  the  Church,  to 
preserve  the  traditions,  and  the  opinions,  rites, 
ceremonies,  and  ordinances  of  the  National 
Church. 

How  much  wider  our  sympathies  would  be,  if, 
not  only  in  theory,  but  in  practice,  the  mandates 
of  the  Church,  and  the  field  of  its  labor,  were  not 
limited  by  the  mutations  of  worldly  politics !  Ne- 
cessarily, the  National  Church  must  be  limited  to 
the  English-speaking  people,  throughout  the  world, 
and  those  whom  they  have  assimilated,  so  that  they 
have  become  one  with  them,  in  their  civilization, 
and  their  ideals. 

Other  races  of  men  require  a  particular  church, 
with  rites,  traditions,  laws,  ordinances,  and  cere- 
monies that  would  not  commend  themselves  to  the 
English-speaking  people.  So  long  as  they  profess, 
and  teach  the  faith  and  religion  of  Christ,  accord- 
ing to  Scripture  and  the  Apostolic  doctrine,  the 


158  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Church  of  the  great  Anglican  Communion  has  for 
them  only  words  of  affectionate  benediction. 

"In  these  our  doings,  we  condemn  no  other 
nations,  nor  prescribe  anything  but  to  our  own 
people  only.  For  we  think  it  convenient,  that 
every  country  should  use  such  ceremonies,  as  they 
shall  think  best,  to  the  setting  forth  of  God's  hon- 
or and  glory,  and  to  the  reducing  of  the  people  to 
a  most  perfect  and  godly  living,  without  error  or 
superstition ;  and  that  they  should  put  away  other 
things,  which  from  time  to  time,  they  perceive  to 
be  most  abused,  as  in  men's  ordinances  it  often 
chanceth,  diversely,  in  diverse  countries."  In- 
stead of  "country,"  read  "race,"  and  this  quota- 
tion, from  the  preface  of  the  English  Prayer  Book, 
is  the  best  solution  of  the  difficult  question  of  evan- 
gelizing the  world. 

The  Kegro,  or  the  Japanese,  or  the  Hindoo 
cannot,  at  least  for  a  long  time  to  come,  become  one 
with  the  English-speaking  race.  The  modes  of 
thought,  the  temperament,  the  ideals,  of  these  races 
differentiate  them  from  us ;  so  that,  to  expect  that 
our  worship  could  become  naturalized  among  them, 
is  absurd.  We  cannot  make  them  Prayer  Book 
Churchmen.  But,  under  God's  blessing,  we  can 
help  them  to  form  a  particular  Church  for  their 
race,  which,  while  holding  fast  to  Catholic  Faith, 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      1 59 

and  order,  on  the  one  hand,  shall,  on  the  other, 
adopt  and  create  such  traditions,  opinions,  rites, 
ceremonies,  and  ordinances,  as  will  express  most 
fully,  the  spirit  of  devout  worship,  and  obedience 
to  the  Law  of  Christ. 

Wherever  that  particular  Church,  say  of  the 
Japanese,  is  represented,  whether  in  the  islands  of 
the  far  Pacific,  or  in  some  colony,  possibly  in  the 
West  Indies,  or  in  South  America,  why  should  it 
not  be  considered  the  one  national  Japanese 
Church  ?  No  matter  in  how  many  civil  divisions  of 
the  globe  it  may  exist. 

It  is  the  same  oneness,  that  we  would  wish  for 
the  Anglican  Church,  over  all  the  world,  with  pro- 
vincial government,  which  would  guide  its  onward 
movement,  and  preserve  inviolate  everywhere,  our 
faith,  and  order.  Nothing  would  so  powerfully 
tend  to  restore  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  and 
give  such  articulate  voice,  to  its  authoritative 
utterance. 

It  becomes  Churchmen  to  guard  with  reverent 
and  loyal  love  the  rights  and  liberties  of  our 
National  Church.  In  a  divided  Christendom  our 
Church  is  the  one  possible  rallying  place,  of  those 
who  long,  and  pray  for  the  reunion  of  the  family 
of  Christ.  The  full  heritage  of  the  Catholic 
Church  is  our  possession. 


160  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Our  faith  is  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints.  Our  orders  are  those  of  the  Apostles.  Our 
tradition  is  that  of  absolute  loyalty  to  the  teaching 
of  the  fathers,  and  obedience  to  the  Canons  of  the 
ancient  councils. 

We  have  not  separated  from  our  brethren,  how- 
ever ready  they  may  have  been  to  go  out  from  us. 
We  have  not  added  to  the  Catholic  Creed,  a  series 
of  Articles,  which  must  first  be  renounced,  before 
we  can  seriously  ask  others  to  unite  with  us.  But, 
standing  fast  in  the  old  paths,  as  an  independent 
National  Church,  we  wait,  with  confidence,  the 
day  wlien  all  men  will  also  come  to  this  common 
heritage  of  tlie  faith,  which  we  have  never 
deserted. 

As  Churchmen  we  have  our  duty  to  perform, 
and  must  not  shrink  from  it.  On  what  terms  may 
other  men  come  to  our  Communion  ?  It  is  an  in- 
quiry which  has  not  received  an  adequate  answer. 
But  there  should  be  a  solemn  rite  by  which  men 
may  be  received,  who  come  to  us  from  other  religi- 
ous bodies.  They  have,  let  us  suppose,  been 
baptized  with  water,  "in  the  Name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  ;  and  there- 
fore may  be  presumed  to  stand  in  the  same  relation 
to  the  Church,  as  persons  who  have  received  clin- 
ical baptism  from  our  owm  clergy.     Charity  could 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      161 

not  go  any  farther  than  that.  Such  persons  we 
know  are  required  publicly  to  confess  the  vows  of 
Holy  baptism,  and  are  solemly  received  into  the 
Church ;  and  I  think  that  the  same  confession,  and 
public  reception,  should  mark  the  admission  of 
every  soul  that  comes  to  our  Communion,  from 
other  religious  bodies. 

All  such  persons  should  be  reconciled  to  the 
Church  also,  by  the  rite  of  Confirmation.  Of 
course,  when  members  of  the  various  evangelical 
denominations,  as  they  are  ordinarily  designated, 
have  been  received  into  the  Church,  their  confirma- 
tion is  a  necessity,  as  they  have  never  received  the 
Apostolic  rite ;  but  when  persons  come  to  us  from 
the  Roman  Communion,  or  in  the  remote  contin- 
gency, of  their  coming  to  us  from  the  Greek  Com- 
munion ;  is  it  sufiicient,  solemnly  to  receive  them 
into  the  Church,  and  admit  them  to  the  Holy  Com- 
munion, or  should  they  be  Confirmed  afresh  ?  It 
seems  to  me  that  they  must  receive  the  rite  of  Con- 
firmation. 

Our  Xational  Church  is  the  guardian  of  the 
truth,  and  it  is  pledged  to  be  loyal  to  it,  under  all 
circumstances.  It  stands  by  the  ancient  tradition 
of  the  Church,  and  reverently  obeys  the  Word  of 
God.  From  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  we  derive  our  authority  for  the  Form  of 


162  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


Confirmation.  The  text  reads :  "Then  laid  they 
their  hands  on  them  and  they  received  the  Holy 
Ghost."  And  again:  "\Ylien  Simon  saw  that 
through  the  laying  on  of  the  Apostles'  hands  the 
Holy  Ghost  was  given."  The  divinely  appointed 
ritual  act,  by  which  the  seven-fold  Spirit  is  im- 
parted, is  the  Laying  on  of  Apostolic  Hands. 

But  this  Apostolic  ordinance  has  been  prac- 
tically disregarded,  in  both  the  Greek  and  Roman 
Communions,  and  the  ceremony  of  anointing  has 
been  substituted  for  it.  Originally,  the  anointing 
was  part  of  the  ceremony  attending  the  administra- 
tion of  the  Sacrament  of  Holy  Baptism.  There 
was  an  anointing  of  the  candidate  before  the 
administration  of  the  Sacrament,  and  an  anointing 
afterwards. 

In  the  Roman  Ofiice  of  Baptism  we  find  traces 
of  these  ancient  ceremonies.  The  infant,  before 
it  is  baptized,  is  to  be  anointed  on  the  breast,  and 
between  the  shoulders  with  the  ''Oleum  Catechu- 
menorum;"  and,  after  baptism,  it  is  anointed 
again  with  the  Chrism  "in  sumitate  capitis,  in 
modum  crucis."  It  was  this  second  anointing, 
which  in  the  course  of  time,  became  attached  to  the 
rite  of  Confirmation,  and  presently  was  substituted 
for  it.  Wlien  the  corruption  took  place  we  cannot 
say. 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      163 

In  the  Eastern  Church,  it  had  become  firmly 
established  in  the  age  of  St.  Cyril,  who,  in  his 
catechetical  lectures,  mentions  the  mysteries  in  the 
following  order:  Baptism,  the  Chrism,  the  first 
Communion.  He  has  nothing  to  say  about  the 
Laying  on  of  Hands,  but  describes  the  Eastern 
mode  of  Confirmation  in  these  words :  "The  oint- 
ment is  applied  to  the  forehead,  ears,  nostrils, 
mouth,  and  breast,  implying  that  the  soul  is  sancti- 
fied by  the  holy  and  life-giving  Spirit."  The 
Bishop  is  to  consecrate  the  Chrism,  but  it  may  be 
applied  by  a  priest.  Substantially,  this  is  the 
present  form  of  Confirmation  in  the  Eastern 
Church. 

In  the  Roman  Pontifical,  there  are  three 
ofiices  of  Confirmation.  There  is  the  ancient 
office,  in  which  the  Confirmation  is  said  to  be 
effected  by  the  application  of  the  Chrism.  "Signo 
te  signo  Crucis,  et  confirmo  te,  chrismate  salutis 
in  ]S[omine  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti ;"  and 
in  the  appendix  there  are  two  Offices  of  Confirma- 
tion, in  which  the  rubric  allows  for  a  sort  of 
stealthy  or  surreptitious  laying  on  of  hands,  prob- 
ably inserted  here,  as  a  sort  of  answer  to  criticism. 

The  rubric  says,  that  when  the  Bishop  con- 
firms, saying:  ''I  sign  thee  with  the  sign  of  the 
cross,  and  confirm  thee  with  the  chrism  of  Salva- 


164  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


tion,  in  the  Xame  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  he  is  to  lay  his  right  hand  on 
the  head  of  the  person  he  is  confirming,  and  with 
his  thumb  anointed  with  chrism,  makes  the  sign  of 
the  cross  on  his  forehead.  Can  we  condone  this 
substitution  of  an  unauthorized  rite,  for  the 
Scriptural  ordinance  of  the  Laying  on  of  Hands, 
and  call  it  Confirmation  ? 

In  the  Eastern  Church,  the  oil  has  become  so 
completely  the  confirming  instrmuent,  that  a 
Bishop  is  only  needed  to  consecrate  it.  It  can  be 
carried  an^'^vhere,  and  applied  by  a  priest.  No 
one  pretends  that  a  priest  has  any  Apostolic 
authority  to  confirm,  so  that  the  Confirmation 
depends  altogether,  on  the  Chrism,  and  not  on  the 
orders  of  the  person  administering  it. 

But  it  is  not  so  with  the  Laying  on  of  Hands. 
When  Simon  Magus  desired  to  have  the  power  to 
confirm,  he  did  not  offer  moncv  for  a  flask  of 
Chrism,  but  he  said  :  '^Give  me  also  this  power,  that 
on  whomsoever  I  lay  hands,  he  may  receive  the 
Holy  Ghost."  The  Koman  rite  of  Confirmation 
does  not  seem  any  more  justifiable  than  the  East- 
ern rite,  from  wliich  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  has 
been  completely  eliminated.  For  the  Roman  rite 
solemnly  declares  that  the  Chrism  is  the  instru- 
ment of  Confirmation.     "Confirmo  te  Chrismate 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      165 

Salutis."  There  is  a  sort  of  stealthy  laying  on  of 
hands  by  the  Roman  bishop,  provided  for,  in  the 
service,  in  the  Appendix  of  the  Pontifical. 

But  we  have  no  business  to  attach  any  more 
importance  to  it,  than  the  Roman  Church  does. 
It  does  not  attach  any  virtue,  or  significance  to  it 
whatever.  But  it  deliberately  declares,  that  the 
application  of  the  consecrated  oil,  is  the  confirm- 
ing act. 

What,  then,  is  the  duty  of  the  Apostolic 
Church,  when  persons  thus  Confirmed,  seek  admis- 
sion to  its  Communion  ?  If  fidelity  to  the  teaching 
of  Holy  Scripture  is  a  primary  obligation,  I  do  not 
see  how  we  can  justify  a  confirmation  which  does 
not  profess  to  be  effected  at  all,  by  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands,  but  by  the  application  of  Chrism.  It  cer- 
tainly must  be  doubtful  to  say  the  least,  and  there- 
fore, in  charity  the  Church  should  bestow  an 
undoubtedly  valid  Confirmation  on  those  coming 
to  its  communion,  who  have  received  this  defective 
rite. 

It  was  only  very  gradually  that  the  unscript- 
ural  anointing  usurped  the  place  of  the  Laying  on 
of  Hands  in  the  Western  Church.  Cyprian  does 
not  mention  it  at  all  in  his  description  of  Confirm- 
ation. With  him.  Confirmation  meant  the  impo- 
sition of  Hands.     Even  as  late  as  A.D.  441,  the 


166  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

first  Council  of  Orange  ordered  that  Chrism 
should  not  be  administered  at  Confirmation,  un- 
less, from  some  necessary  cause,  it  had  been  omit- 
ted at  baptism.  Centuries  later,  Alcuin  describes 
Confirmation,  mentions  only  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands,  and  says  nothing  about  any  anointing  with 
Chrism.  "Xovissime,  per  impositionem  manus  a 
summo  sacerdote,  septiformis  gratiae  Spiritum 
accepit." 

But  in  the  case  of  Romanists  seeking  admission 
to  our  Communion,  Confirmation  must  be  admin- 
istered, not  only  to  supply  a  rite  which  is  defective, 
but  for  the  further  reason,  that  they  come  from  a 
Communion  which  is  schismatical,  and  heretical. 

In  the  year  1570,  the  Bishop  of  Rome  excom- 
municated and  deposed,  so  far  as  he  could.  Queen 
Elizabeth,  and  cursed  all  who  should  yield  obedi- 
ence to  her.  Thus  he  encouraged  a  party  to  separ- 
ate from  the  Catholic  Church  of  England ;  a  sepa- 
ration which  is  spoken  of,  by  all  writers  at  that 
time,  as  novel  and  unprecedented ;  and  to  this  sect 
he  sent  missionaries,  and  vicars-apostolic,  to  with- 
draw the  people  from  allegiance  to  their  legitimate 
pastors.  He,  and  those  who  followed  him,  separ- 
ated from  us. 

As  I  have  shown,  the  Catholic  Church  of  Eng- 
land   never  separated    itself    from    the    rest    of 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      167 

Christendom,  or  refused  fraternal  recognition  of 
other  Churches.  We  did  not  go  out  from  them, 
but  they  went  out  from  us.  They  have  committed 
the  sin  of  schism.  And  when  the  schismatic 
returns  to  the  Church,  he  must  be  formally  recon- 
ciled to  it. 

Again,  the  Church  of  Kome  has  been  guilty  of 
heresy.  Heresy  is  not  only  the  denial  of  the 
Faith ;  it  means,  also,  adding  to  the  Faith  unwar- 
rantable and  false  dogmas.  This  was  the  sin  of 
those  false  teachers,  who  had  perverted  the  Gala- 
tian  Church,  and  whom  St.  Paul  visits  with  the 
extreme  sentence  of  excommunication.  In  addi- 
tion to  the  Christian  Faith,  they  had  added  certain 
requirements  of  the  Mosaic  law,  such  as  Circum- 
cision, as  necessary  to  salvation.  "Except  ye  be 
circumcised  ye  cannot  be  saved." 

The  Church  has,  in  General  Councils,  set  forth 
the  JSTicene  Creed  as  the  true  confession  of  Faith. 
To  this  Faith,  Rome  added  the  so-called  Creed  of 
Pope  Pius  lY.,  A.D.  1564,  in  which  the  belief  in 
the  seven  sacraments,  in  transubstantiation,  in  pur- 
gatory, in  the  veneration  of  saints  and  images,  in 
indulgences,  in  the  Roman  Church- as  the  Mother  of 
Churches,  and  in  the  bishop  of  Rome,  as  the  succes- 
sor of  Peter,  and  the  vicar  of  Christ;  and  the 
acceptance  of  all  the  definitions  of  the  Council  of 


168  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Trent  is  pronounced  the  true  Catholic  faith,  with- 
out which  no  one  can  be  saved.  To  these  particu- 
lars, there  has  been  added,  the  dogmas  of  the  Im- 
maculate Conception,  and  of  the  Papal  Infallibil- 

ity. 

If,  when  the  Judaising  teachers  added  to  the 

Faith  the  requirement  of  circumcision,  as  neces- 
sary to  salvation,  St.  Paul  counted  them  accursed, 
we  cannot  hesitate  to  brand  as  heretical,  those  false 
teachings  which  the  Roman  Church  has  fastened 
on  the  Creed,  as  necessary  to  salvation. 

And  when  Romanists  seek  admission  to  our 
Communion,  it  is  necessary  that  they  should  be 
reconciled  to  the  Church,  by  that  solemn  rite  by 
which  the  Catholic  Church  has,  from  ancient  days, 
always  reconciled  the  schismatic  and  the  heretic; 
that  is  to  say  by  Confirmation. 

We  stand  by  the  principles  of  the  ancient  un- 
divided Catholic  Church  :  When  penitents  returned 
to  the  Church,  from  heretical,  or  schismatical  bod- 
ies, if  their  baptism  was  formally  complete,  it  was 
recognized  as  valid.  The  orders  of  their  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons,  also  were  recognized;  but 
their  confirmation  was  regarded  as  null  and  void, 
and  they  were  invariably  re-confirmed. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  heretic  and  schismatic 
were,  in  ancient  times  reconciled  to  the  Church  by 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      169 


the  Laying  on  of  Hands ;  but  it  has  been  often  taken 
for  granted,  that  this  was  a  sort  of  benediction,  or 
a  penitential  ceremony,  and  not  Confirmation. 
But  antiquity  does  not  ofl^er  a  shred  of  evidence  for 
any  such  theory.  In  the  anonymous  treatise,  on 
the  re-baptism  of  heretics,  written  by  some  ecclesi- 
astic attached  to  Stephen,  bishop  of  Eome,  at  the 
time  of  his  contest  with  Cyprian,  and  in  several 
of  the  epistles  of  Cyprian,  the  reconciling  of  here- 
tics by  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  is  mentioned^ 
again  and  again,  and  the  ceremony  is  treated  as 
identical  with  the  confirmation  administered  by 
the  Apostles  to  the  Samaritans. 

Sixty  years  after  Cyprian's  death,  the  Council 
of  Aries  orders  that  heretics,  returning  to  the 
Church,  should  be  reconciled  by  the  imposition  of 
hands,  that  they  might  receive  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Siricius,  bishop  of  Eome,  writes,  A.D.  384,  that 
converts  from  Arianism  are  not  to  be  re-baptized, 
but  attached  to  the  Catholic  Communion,  by  means 
of  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  only,  by  impo- 
sition of  the  bishop's  hand.  Pope  Innocent,  A.D. 
415,  says,  Arians  are  to  be  received  into  the 
Church,  by  imposition  of  hands  to  give  them  the 
Spirit.  St.  Augustine  says  that  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands  is  not,  like  baptism,  incapable  of  repetition, 
and  insists  that  heretics  must  thus  be  reconciled  to 


170  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

the  Church.  Jerome,  in  his  dialogue  with  the 
Luciferian,  also  declares  that  the  heretics  are  to  be 
received  with  the  Laying  on  of  Hands,  and  identi- 
fies the  rite  with  the  gift  conferred  by  the  Apostles 
on  the  Samaritans. 

About  this  time,  the  Chrism  began  to  be  widely 
recognized  in  the  Western  Church  as  part  of  the 
Confirmation  rite,  and  so  the  first  Council  of 
Orange,  the  second  Council  of  Aries,  and  the 
Council  of  Epone  declare,  that  heretics  must  be 
reconciled  with  the  Chrism,  and  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands. 

We  see,  then,  that  in  the  Western  Church,  in 
ancient  days  the  penitent,  coming  from  heresy,  or 
schism,  was  invariably  reconciled  by  the  rite  of 
Confirmation.  The  practice  of  the  Eastern 
Church  was  the  same.  The  seventh  Canon  of  the 
second  General  Council,  held  in  Constantinople, 
A.D.  381,  directs  that  heretics,  whose  baptism  is 
valid,  are  to  be  reconciled  to  the  Church,  with  the 
precise  ritual,  acts  and  words  of  Confirmation. 
They  are  to  be  anointed  on  the  forehead,  eyes, 
nostrils,  mouth,  and  ears,  with  the  Chrism,  the 
officiant  saying,  ''The  seal  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 
The  Council  of  Laodicea,  Canon  seven,  declares 
that  heretics  are  to  be  anointed  with  the  Chrism, 
and  then  admitted  to  the  Holy  Communion.      St. 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      171 


Basil,  and  the  pseudo  Justin  Martyr,  give  the 
same  directions,  and  the  Quinisext  Council  re- 
affirms the  decree,  of  the  Second  General  Council, 
which  I  have  already  quoted. 

Further  testimony  is  unnecessary,  as  these 
voices  are  final  and  authoritative.  Looking  over 
the  history  of  the  Catholic  Church  from  the  age 
of  Cyprian,  to  the  sixth  century,  I  cannot  find, 
anywhere,  any  difference  mentioned  between  Con- 
firmation and  the  rule  by  which  penitents  were 
reconciled  to  the  Church.  Over,  and  over  again, 
writers  compare  the  rite,  by  which  the  heretic  was 
admitted  to  the  Communion,  with  the  two  cases  of 
Confirmation  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of  the  Holy 
Apostles. 

There  is  a  wide  spread  notion,  that  the  peniten- 
tial laying  on  of  hands,  by  which  the  heretic  was 
reconciled,  was  not  Confirmation.  The  early 
church  knew  no  such  distinction.  It  was  the 
invention  of  some  obscure  interpolator.  It  is  first 
to  be  found  in  a  letter  purposing  to  have  been  sent 
by  Pope  Vigilius,  A.D.  538,  to  Himerius.  This 
letter  speaks  of  the  reconciliation  of  heretics,  and 
in  it  we  find  this  sentence:  "Their  reconciliation 
is  not  effected  by  means  of  that  imposition  of  the 
hand,  which  takes  place  through  invocation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  but  by  means  of  that  imposition,  by 


172  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


which  the  fruit  of  penitence  is  acquired,  and  the 
restoration  to  the  Holy  Communion  is  performed." 
The  letter  is  a  discredited  document.  It  exists  in 
more  than  one  form,  and  has  been  largely  inter- 
polated in  the  interest  of  the  Eoman  See,  and  the 
sentence  I  have  quoted  is  one  of  these  interpola- 
tions. Like  many  other  Roman  novelties,  it  con- 
tradicts the  teaching  of  Cyprian,  of  Augustine,  of 
Jerome,  of  the  early  councils,  of  the  early  bishops 
of  the  Roman  See  itself,  all  of  whom  expressly 
declare,  that  the  imposition  of  hands  is  adminis- 
tered to  the  penitent  heretic,  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  conveying  the  seven-fold  gifts  of  the  Spirit. 
It  seems  to  me,  therefore,  that  the  Anglican 
Communion,  as  the  guardian  of  Catholic  tradition, 
and  the  witness  of  the  truth,  has  only  one  course 
open  to  it,  when  those  who  have  been  brought  up  in 
the  Roman  Church,  seek  admission  to  our  fold. 
Whereas  the  rite  of  Confirmation  wliich  they  have 
received  is  so  unscriptural,  and  defective  as  to  be 
of  doubtful  validity,  and  whereas  they  come  to  us 
from  a  Communion  which  has  separated  from  us, 
and  is,  therefore,  guilty  of  schism,  and  which  has 
added  to  the  Creed  false  and  unwarranted  articles 
of  faith,  it  is  our  duty  to  receive  all  such  penitents 
with  the  rite  of  Confirmation,  in  accordance  with 
the  ancient  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church. 


The  Indepeyidence  of  National  Churches.      173 

The  independence  of  National  Churches  ia  one 
of  our  fundamental  principles.  It  seems  to  me 
that  often  we  have  a  very  inadequate  conception  of 
the  grandeur  of  our  spiritual  inheritance.  Our 
attitude  is  apologetic  as  if  our  venerable  Com- 
munion needed  many  excuses  for  its  shortcomings. 

We  need  apologies,  indeed,  because  we  are  so 
unworthy  of  our  spiritual  birth-right;  but  the 
great  Church  of  which  we  are  such  unworthy  mem- 
bers, has  nothing  to  take  back,  nothing  to  apologize 
for,  nothing  to  be  ashamed  of. 

It  has  been  the  faithful  keeper,  and  witness  of 
the  Word  of  God,  and  has  ministered  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  to  the  whole  English-speaking  race 
throughout  the  world,  which  receives,  and  reads 
the  Word  of  God,  everywhere,  as  this  Church  hath 
interpreted  it. 

It  has  kept  inviolate  the  Creeds  of  the  Church, 
neither  mutilating,  nor  interpolating  the  symbol 
handed  down  from  ancient  days ;  it  has  loyally 
followed  and  submitted  to  the  ancient  traditions 
and  Canons  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  has  gener- 
ously striven,  under  great  provocation,  to  follow 
peace  with  all  men,  and  to  seek  the  re-union,  of  all 
who  profess  and  call  themselves  Christians  in  one. 
holy  Catholic  Church. 

It  has   reverently   preserved   and   obeyed   the 


174  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Apostolic  ministry  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons, 
and  with  a  willing  mind  has  sent  forth  that  min- 
istry to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  that  the  nations  may, 
by  its  labors,  be  gathered  into  the  flock  of  Christ. 
And  it  has  stood  in  the  evil  day,  and  having  suf- 
fered many  things,  it  still  stands,  in  its  national 
independence,  the  one  great  bulwark  against  spir- 
itual oppression,  and  moral  corruption,  the  one 
steadfast  witness  of  Apostolic  order,  of  Catholic 
tradition,  of  evangelical  truth. 

It  is,  to-day,  the  one  steadfast  representative  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  It  occupies  the  homestead, 
and  to  its  position  other  men  must  come,  from  the 
East  and  the  West,  when  the  hour  of  re-union  shall 
arrive. 

If  our  Church  desired  to  base  its  authority  on 
fables,  it  would  be  an  easv  matter  for  some  master 
of  romance,  to  invent  for  it  a  body  of  Pauline 
claims  which  would  offset  the  Petrine  claims  with 
which  Rome  has  so  successfully  conjured  in  the 
past. 

There  is  more  contemporary  evidence  to  show 
that  St.  Paul  had  the  primacy  of  the  whole  Gentile 
world,  and  that  he  founded  the  British  Church, 
than  there  is  for  the  assertion  that  Peter  ever 
visited  Rome.  !Mot  a  word  in  the  account  of  his 
life,  or  in  his  writings,  nor  in  the  letters  that  St. 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      175 

Paul  wrote  at  Rome,  nor  in  the  letter  he  wrote  to 
the  Romans,  ever  hints  that  Peter  was  within  a 
thousand  miles  of  the  Imperial  City.  The  Apos- 
tle had  been  dead  more  than  one  hundred  years 
before  anyone  mentioned,  so  far  as  we  know,  that 
he  had  visited  Rome.  And  one  hundred  years  is  a 
long  time.  Many  a  story  Avith  no  basis  of  fact 
could  be  invented  in  that  space  of  time. 

All  the  Apostles  sleep  in  obscure  graves ;  the 
time  of  their  departure  was  not  a  relic-worshipping 
age.  Christians  were  living  in  constant  anticipa- 
tion of  the  coming  of  Christ.  In  their  estimation, 
it  mattered  little  where  the  saints  might  be  sleep- 
ing. It  was  only  for  a  little  while.  In  a  few 
days,  in  a  year  or  two  at  most,  the  Resurrection 
would  occur.  Hence  no  pains  were  taken  to  re- 
member or  commemorate  the  death  of  the  Apostles. 

Some  time  about  the  middle  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, an  Ebionite  Jew,  the  writer  of  the  Clemen- 
tine forgeries,  invented  the  story  of  Peter's  visit  to 
Rome,  and  in  the  course  of  a  few  centuries  the 
minute  details  of  his  life  there  for  twenty-five 
years,  were  elaborated,  many  of  which  would  be  a 
great  surprise  to  Peter  if  he  were  to  come  back 
to  us  from  his  unknown  grave  in  Mesopotamia. 

I  have  often  thought  what  an  opportunity  for 
the  writer  of  the  marvellous  was  lost,  when  the 


176  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Primacy  of  St.  Paul  was  not  exploited  !  He  had  an 
Apostolic  commission  beyond  any  question,  that 
included  all  the  Gentiles.  While  the  rest  of  the 
Apostles  were  to  confine  themselves  to  those  of  the 
circumcision,  to  him  was  committed  a  universal 
episcopate  including  all  the  nations.  It  was,  we 
know,  from  his  own  confession,  the  ardent  desire 
of  the  Apostle  not  only  to  visit  Rome,  but  to  carry 
the  Gospel  to  those  unknown  western  regions  where 
the  power  of  the  empire  was  slowly  extending. 

We  have  the  testimony  of  Clement,  that  after 
his  first  imprisonment  at  Rome,  he  penetrated  to 
the  utmost  bounds  of  the  West,  an  expression  which 
probably  refers  to  Great  Britain.  It  is  possible 
that  it  was  he  who  founded  the  Cliurch  in  Great 
Britain,  and  the  great  Cathedral  in  London  dedi- 
cated to  his  blessed  memory  may  also  mark  the  seat 
of  the  only  episcopate  which  has  any  positive  Oecu- 
menical authority.  But  our  Church  rests  its 
claims  on  no  shadowy  and  superstitious  figments. 
It  stands  for  the  Christian  liberty  of  the  whole 
family  of  Christ,  and  asserts  the  independence  of 
national  Churches. 

It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  Roman  Church  vir- 
tually asserts  the  same  principle.  It  sees  that  a 
majority  of  the  cardinals  shall  always  be  Italians, 
so  that  the  rights  of  that  national  Church  shall  at 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      177 

all  events  be  secured.  But  if  one  may  read  the 
signs  of  the  times,  it  is  God's  will  that  our  national 
Church  should  be  the  spiritual  heir  of  that  Apos- 
tolic heritage  committed  to  St.  Paul.  The  day  of 
the  Latin  race  has  passed  away.  The  ghost  of  the 
old  heathen  empire,  which  has  so  long  sat  by  the 
Tiber  asserting  claims  to  universal  empire  is  fad- 
ing out. 

And  it  seems  to  be  God's  will  that  the  leader- 
ship of  the  world  should  pass  to  the  English-speak- 
ing people.  Already  one  fourth  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  world  are  subject  to  its  influence,  and  daily 
that  influence  is  extending.  Under  God's  provi- 
dence, the  course  of  human  events  is  tending  to 
fuse  the  English-speaking  people  into  one  great 
brotherhood,  animated  everywhere  by  the  same 
ambitions,  cherishing  the  same  aims,  and  holding 
in  common  the  same  traditions  and  sympathies. 

And  surely  it  is  God's  will  that  the  Church  of 
the  English-speaking  race,  which  has  given  it  the 
Bible,  which  has  educated  it  until  it  is  the  foremost 
of  the  nations,  has  before  it  a  grand  future,  whose 
possibilities  of  usefulness  and  beneficence  are  un- 
bounded. If  it  can  gather  together  the  scattered 
sheep  in  one  fold,  if  it  can  raise  up  the  standard  of 
truth,  so  that  all  who  love  our  Lord  shall  flock  to- 
gether, and  if  it  can  show  the  way  where  the  hosts 


178  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

of  the  Redeemer  can  follow,  to  win  new  conquests 
for  the  Prince  of  Peace,  how  blessed  shall  be  its 
mission ! 

It  can  surely  do  so  if  the  men  who  serve  it  to- 
day will  respond  to  the  grandeur  of  their  birth- 
right. The  Church  needs  men  valiant,  lojal,  and 
obedient,  to  do  its  bidding.  Its  sons  should  be 
true  men,  knowing  that  they  serve  the  Catholic 
Church.  Its  peace  should  be  the  deepest  desire  of 
their  heart,  and  its  authority  their  final  and  con- 
clusive rule.  Its  rites  and  ceremonies  must  be 
their  standard  of  ritual.  It  has  all  authority,  and 
can  change  them  at  will.  What  it  orders,  there- 
fore, what  its  custom  or  tradition  may  be,  is  the 
rule  for  the  loyal. 

It  is  the  Keeper  of  the  truth ;  and  its  interpre- 
tation of  truth,  its  Creeds,  its  Orders,  its  Sacra- 
ments, are  to  its  loyal  sons  the  messages  of  God. 
All  the  pettiness  of  those  internal  conflicts  about 
ritual,  or  minor  points  of  doctrine,  which  divide 
men  into  schools,  and  turn  their  energies  against 
each  other,  should  be  shamed  into  silence.  In  an 
army  on  the  march  against  the  foe,  the  soldier  is  a 
traitor  who  creates  dissension  among  his  com- 
rades in  the  ranks. 

But  the  Church  is  more  than  an  army.  It  is 
a  family,  and  the  chivalrous  tenderness,  the  rever- 


The  Independence  of  National  Churches.      179 

ence,  the  obedience,  of  sons  serving  their  mother, 
should  mark  the  attitude  of  the  sons  of  the  Church. 
Hugh  James  Rose  rebuked  John  Henry  Newman 
for  his  lack  of  that  spirit  ten  years  before  the  man 
became  an  apostate.  His  lack  of  the  spirit  of  loy- 
alty and  love  for  the  Church,  his  unfilial  temper, 
was  the  beginning  of  his  perversion. 

Our  blessed  Master  has  left  us  an  example. 
The  Good  Shepherd  layeth  down  His  life  for  the 
sheep,  but  the  hireling  fleeth  because  he  is  an  hire- 
ling. Selfishness  is  his  animating  principle,  and 
his  thought  is  self,  and  not  the  Church.  Christ 
loved  the  Church,  and  gave  Himself  for  it. 

If  in  this  respect  we  can  follow  our  Master 
even  afar  off,  then  the  boundless  opportunities 
which  God  has  set  before  the  National  Church  of 
the  Anglican  Communion  will  be  seized,  and  the 
blessings  it  is  empowered  to  bestow  on  the  world 
as  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth,  as  the  stead- 
fast witness  of  Apostolic  tradition  and  of  Christian 
liberty,  and  as  the  rallying  place,  where  men  may 
meet  and  find  unity  and  liberty,  will  be  made  so 
manifest  that  ever\^vhere  the  seekers  after  truth 
will  exclaim,  "We  will  go  with  you,  for  we  have 
heard  that  God  is  with  you." 


APPENDIX. 

Cbe  Rc-confirmatlon  of  Romanists 

Seeking  Jldmission  to  our  Gommunion. 

A  Letter  to  the  Rt.  Rev.  Wm.   Croswell  Doane, 
D.D.,  Bishop  of  Albany. 

[published  by  request  of  the  bishop.] 

Rt.  Rev.  and  dear  Bishop: 

N  your  Pastoral  Letter,  entitled  "The  Service 


T 


of  Preaching  and  the  Preaching  of  the  Ser- 
vice," you  deal  briefly  with  the  question  of  the 
Confirmation  of  Romanists  seeking  admission  to 
our  Communion.  The  question  of  the  validity  of 
the  Roman  rite  of  Confirmation  you  decide,  with- 
out hesitation,  in  the  affirmative,  the  objections  to 
its  form  being,  in  your  judgment,  without  weight, 
like  the  objections  of  the  immersionist  to  the  valid- 


The  Be-confirmation  of  Romanists.         181 

ity  of  Baptism  by  affusion.  The  other  phase  of 
the  question,  the  reconciliation  of  heretics  and 
schismatics,  you  speak  about  with  hesitation.  You 
say,  "If  any  body  needs  purging  and  reconciling 
from  the  sins  of  heresy  and  schism,  it  is  the 
Roman  Catholic  returning  to  Catholicity."  But 
while  admitting  that  the  Romanist  is  in  heresy,you 
are  inclined  to  view  the  Catholic  Rite  of  Laying  on 
of  Hands,  by  which  the  heretic  is  reconciled  to  the 
Church,  as  an  act  of  Benediction,  and  not  Contirm- 
ation.  You  add,  that  the  responsibility  of  present- 
ing persons  for  Confirmation  rests  with  the  priest, 
and  that,  unless  the  case  is  specially  referred  to 
you,  you  would  not  feel  justified  in  refusing  to 
confirm  a  Romanist  convert  if  presented. 

It  has  always  been  my  practice  to  present  con- 
verts from  Romanism  for  Confirmation,  and  my 
scruples  on  this  point  have  invariably  been  treated 
by  you  with  kindly  forbearance.  I  have  known 
that  you  were  clearly  of  the  opinion  that  the 
Roman  Rite  of  Confirmation  was  valid,  and  I  was 
also  aware  that  you  declined,  for  the  present,  until 
you  had  had  leisure  to  examine  the  question  more 
thoroughly,  to  pronounce  on  the  nature  ot  the  Lay- 
ing on  of  Hands  by  which  the  heretic  is  reconciled 
to  the  Church.  In  setting  forth,  therefore,  as 
briefly  as  I  can,  the  grounds  on  which  I  have  ever 


182  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


held  that  the  re-Confirmation  of  heretics  is  the  cus- 
tom of  the  Catholic  Church,  I  disclaim  that  I  have 
any  controversy  with  mv  Bishop  on  this  grave  sub- 
ject, except  so  far  as  I  call  in  question  the  validity 
of  the  Roman  rite. 

This  is  a  minor  issue,  and  in  my  argument  for 
the  re-Confirmation  of  Komanists,  I  shall  assume 
that  the  form  of  the  Eoman  rite  is  valid.  But 
before  proceeding  to  the  main  issue,  I  must  state 
Avhy  I  call  in  question  the  sufficiency  and  validity 
of  the  Roman  rite. 

From  the  8th  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles we  derive  our  authority  for  the  form  of  Con- 
firmation. The  text  reads,  ''Then  laid  they  their 
hands  on  them  and  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost.'' 
And  again,  ''When  Simon  saw  that  through  laying 
on  of  the  Apostles'   hands  the  Holy  Ghost  was 


given." 


The  Divinelv  ordered  ritual  act  bv  which  the 
seven-fold  Spirit  is  imparted  is  the  Laying  on  of 
Apostolic  Hands.  But  the  Roman  Rite  distinctly 
states  that  the  Confirmation  is  effected,  not  by  the 
Laying  on  of  Hands,  but  by  the  application  of  the 
Chrism.  "Confirmo  te  Chrismate  salutis."  In 
the  Roman  Pontifical  there  are  three  Offices  of 
Confirmation.  There  is  the  ancient  Office,  where 
the  rubric  calls  only  for  the  application  of  the 


The  Ee-confirmation  of  Romanists.         183 

Chrism  with  the  thumb,  "Signo  te  signo  crucis 
{quod  dum  dicit,  producit  pollice  signum  crucis  in 
frontem  illius)  et  confirmo  te  Chrismate  salutis  in 
Nomine Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti  ;"and  two 
OjfRces  in  the  Appendix,  added  because  of  the  crit- 
icisms of  the  adversaries  of  Kome, where  the  rubric 
provides  for  a  sort  of  surreptitious  Laying  on  of 
the  Hand  at  the  time  of  the  application  of  the 
Chrism.  The  text  repeated  by  the  Bishop  is  the 
same  as  I  have  quoted  from  the  ancient  Office,  but 
the  rubric  reads,  "Et  dum  hoc  dicit,  imposita 
eadem  manu  dextera  super  caput  confirmandi,  pro- 
ducit pollice  signum  crucis  in  frontem  illius." 
This  direction  provides  that  the  Bishop  shall 
lay  his  hand  on  the  head  while  signing,  with 
his  thumb  anointed  with  Chrism,  the  fore- 
head of  the  candidate  for  Confirmation.  But 
here,  also,  the  Confirmation  is  declared  in  the 
most  solemn  manner  to  be  effected  by  the  Chrism : 
"I  confirm  thee  with  the  Chrism  of  Salvation 
in  the  ISTame  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  How  far  are  we  justified 
in  condoning  this  flagrant  substitution  of  an  un- 
authorized rite  for  the  Spiritual  Ordinance  of  the 
Laying  on  of  Hands  ?  One  can  see  how  far  the 
mischief  can  go,  when  he  remembers  that  in  the 
Eastern  Church  the  oil  has  become  the  confirming 


184         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


instrument  so  completely,  that  a  Bishop  is  only 
needed  to  consecrate  the  Chrism.     It  can  be  car- 
ried anywhere  and  applied  by  a  priest.      Xo  one 
among  us  holds  that  the  priest  has  any  Apostolic 
authority  to  confirm,  so  that  the  Confirmation  de- 
pends altogether  on  the  Chrism,  not  on  the  person 
administering  it.     But  that  is  not  the  Laying  on 
of  Hands.     \Mien  Simon  Magus  desired  to  possess 
the  power  of  confirming,  he  did  not  seek  to  pur- 
chase a  flask  of  Chrism,  but  he  said:    ''Give  me 
also  this  power,  that  on  whomsoever  I  lay  hands  he 
may  receive  the  Holy  Ghost."     And  is  the  Roman 
rite  of  Confirmation,  which  solemnly  asserts  that 
the  Chrism  is  the  confirming  agency,  any  more  jus- 
tifiable than  this  Eastern  rite  from  which  the  Lay- 
ing on  of  Hands  has  been  altogether  eliminated  ? 
It  may  be  urged  that  there  is  contact  of  the  hand 
of  the  Bishoj)  with  the  head  of  the  candidate  at  the 
time  Chrism  is  administered,  but  can  the  Episcopal 
hand  do  that  thing  which  at  the  same  moment  the 
Bishop  distinctly  and  solemnly  affirms  to  be  done 
by    another    agency,     ''Confirmo    te     Chrismate 
Sahitis"  ?     I  think  not.     It  seems  to  me  we  have 
no  right  to  attach  to  that  Laying  on  of  Hands  any 
more  importance  than  the  Roman   Church   does 
itself.       There  is  nothing  in  the  Office  of  Confirm- 
ation as  given  in  the  Roman  Pontifical  to  show  that 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        185 

the  act  has  any  virtue  or  significance.  Unless, 
then,  whenever  a  Bishop  lays  his  hand  on  a  child's 
head,  the  act  has  the  virtue  of  Confirmation,  it  is 
difficult  to  see  on  what  grounds  we  can  say  that  in 
the  Roman  Rite  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  is  given. 
It  is  to  be  remembered  that  in  the  ancient  rite,  in 
the  beginning  of  the  Pontifical  there  is  no  provi- 
sion for  any  Laying  on  of  the  Hand  whatever,  and 
the  stealthy  Laying  on  of  the  Hand  provided  for  in 
the  Office  of  the  Appendix,  although  the  Chrism  is 
still  declared  to  be  the  sole  confirming  agency, 
seems  to  me  an  unworthy  subterfuge  that  should 
not  be  condoned.  It  is  as  if  some  one  had  been  pre- 
tending to  baptize  by  putting  his  hand  on  a  child's 
head,  and  when  taxed  with  the  crime  had  tried  to 
justify  himself  by  saying  that  his  hand  was  damp 
when  he  performed  the  ceremony  ,and  therefore 
the  baptism  was  valid. 

It  is  not  a  question  of  putting  a  hand,  or  hands, 
on  the  head  of  the  candidate,  but  rather,  whether 
we  can  justify  a  Confirmation  which  does  not  pro- 
fess to  be  done  by  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  at  all, 
but  by  application  of  the  Chrism. 

It  seems  to  me,  that  before  charity  for  the 
Roman  usage,  we  must  place  fidelity  to  the  Rite,  as 
authorized  in  Holy  Scripture ;  and  that  certainly 
demands  that  the    Office  of    Confirmation,  to  be 


186  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

valid,  must  clearly  show  the  intention  to  impart 
the  gift  which  the  Apostles  gave  to  the  Samaritans 
by  the  same  means  that  they  used — the  Laying  on 
of  Hands. 

I  must  demur  to  the  comparison  of  my  objec- 
tion to  the  Roman  Rite,  to  the  criticism  of  the 
immersionist  against  baptism  by  affusion.  The 
latter  is  evidentlv  administered  with  water,  and 
when  the  Roman  Rite  of  Confirmation  is  so  far 
amended  that  it  shall  be  plain  the  gift  is  conveyed 
not  by  application  of  Chrism,  but  by  the  Laying  on 
of  Hands,  I  will  cheerfully  acknowledge  its  val- 
iditv. 

But  allowing  for  the  sake  of  discussion  that  the 
Roman  Rite  for  Confirmation  is  valid,  it  does  not 
remove  the  necessity  for  re-confirming  the  Roman- 
ist seeking  admission  to  our  Communion.  For 
the  Roman  Church  is  in  heresy,  and  it  is  the  Cath- 
olic custom  to  reconcile  the  heretic  by  Confirma- 
tion. We  all  admit  that  the  heretic  was  received 
into  the  Church  by  the  Laying  on  of  Hands,  but  it 
is  some  times  denied  that  this  ceremony  was  Con- 
firmation. It  is  said  to  have  been  a  different 
thing,  a  Benediction  or  a  penitential  Laying  on  of 
Hands,  but  at  all  events,  not  Confirmation.  The 
plain  evidence  of  antiquity  will  not  justify  this 
assertion.     For   centuries   the   notion   was   never 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        187 

entertained  in  the  Church ;  and,  unfortunately  for 
the  theory,  the  first  attempt  to  differentiate  from 
Confirmation,  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  by  which 
heretics  were  reconciled  to  the  Church,  is  to  be 
found  in  an  Epistle  pretending  to  be  from  Vigil- 
ius.  Bishop  of  Rome,  A.D.,  538,  a  fraudulent,  dis- 
credited document,  which  has  been  largely  inter- 
polated in  the  interests  of  the  Roman  See.  To  go 
into  all  the  evidence  bearing  on  this  subject  would 
far  exceed  the  limits  of  my  time  and  your  pa- 
tience ;  it  will  be  sufficient  to  refer  to  a  few  illus- 
trations from  history,  which  clearly  exhibit  the 
custom  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  which,  I  think, 
plainly  bear  out  my  contention.  If  I  am  in  error 
in  the  interpretation  of  these  facts  I  certainly  find 
myself  in  very  good  company. 

The  learned  Bingham,  in  his  treatise  on  Bap- 
tism, devotes  a  large  space  to  the  confirmation  of 
heretics,  without  a  thought  in  his  mind  that  the 
ceremony  by  which  these  persons  were  reconciled 
to  the  Church,  was  not  Confirmation  at  all. 

In  Smith's  Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiqui- 
ties, under  the  article  "Confirmation"  we  read :  "A 
special  aspect  of  Confirmation  presents  itself  in 
connection  with  the  reception  into  the  Church,  of 
those  who  had  been  baptized  bv  heretics.  Bap- 
tism, if    formally    complete,  was    recognized    as 


188  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


valid,  but  the  case  was  otherwise  with  the  Laying 
on  of  Hands.  Only  in  the  Catholic  Church  could 
the  gifts  of  the  Spirit  be  imparted,  and  so,  even  if 
the  heretical  sect  had  its  Bishops,  and  they  admin- 
istered the  Rite,  it  was  regarded  as  null  and  void. 
When  those,  who  had  been  members  of  such  a 
community,  returned  to  the  Church,  Confirmation, 
including  the  anointing,  as  well  as  the  Laying  on 
of  Hands,  became  the  formal  act  of  admission." 
The  writer  of  the  article  is  E.  H.  Plumptre,  no 
mean  authority  in  the  province  of  historical  criti- 
cism. 

Dr.  Harold  Browne  in  his  work  on  the  Articles 
of  Religion,  commenting  on  Art.  XXV.  says: 
''The  separation  of  Baptism  from  Confirmation 
rose  sometimes  from  the  Confirmation  of  heretics, 
who  were  confirmed  but  not  re-baptized."  I  might 
add  many  similar  testimonies  from  learned  men, 
and  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  seem  to  me  to  ad- 
mit of  no  other  conclusion. 

In  seeking  to  discover  what  was  the  usage  of 
the  Catholic  Church  regarding  the  reception  of 
heretics,  I  would  go  back  to  the  contest  between 
Cyprian  and  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Rome.  As  is 
well  kno^\^l,  Cyprian  contended  that  heretics 
returning  to  the  Church  must  be  re-baptized,  while 
Stephen  insisted  that  the  ancient  custom  of  the 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.         189 


Cluirch  was  to  accept  the  Baptism  if  formally  com- 
plete, and  to  reconcile  the  heretic  by  the  Laying  on 
of  Hands.     What  was  this  ceremony  understood 
to  be?    Was  it  Confirmation  or  something  else? 
I  shall  prove  that  both  Cyprian  and  his  opponents 
looked  upon  it  as  identical  with  the  Eite  which  the 
Apostles   administered   to   the  Samaritans   whom 
Philip  had  baptized,  and  the  Kite  which  St.  Paul 
bestowed  on  the  men  of  Ephesus  after  they  had 
received     Christian    Baptism.     The     anonymous 
treatise  on  the  "Re-baptism  of  Heretics"  (written, 
Canon  Mason  concludes,  by  one  of  the  prelates  in 
the  entourage  of  Stephen)  represents  the  views  of 
the  Roman  party.   We  will  therefore,  first  examine 
its  statements.     In  the  first  section  it  states  the 
question  under  discussion  in  these  words:    "The 
point  is  whether,  according  to  the  most  ancient 
custom  and  ecclesiastical  tradition,  it  would  suf- 
fice, after  that  Baptism  which  they  have  received 
outside  the  Church  indeed,  but  still  in  the  I^ame  of 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  that  only  hands  should  be 
laid  upon  them  by  the  Bishop  for  their  reception 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  this  Imposition  of  Hands 
would  afford  them  the  renewed  and  perfected  seal 
of  faith:  or  whether,  indeed  a  repetition  of  Bap- 
tism would  be  necessary  for  them,  just  as  if  they 
were  never  baptized  in  the  N'ame  of  Jesus  Christ." 


190  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

What  did  this  man  understand  by  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands  mentioned  above?  Can  the  Rite  to  which 
he  refers  be  anything  else  than  Confirmation  ?  Is 
not  the  seven-fold  Spirit  the  Confirmation  gift  ? 

And  the  purpose  of  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  he 
says,  by  which  the  heretics  were  reconciled  accord- 
ing to  the  ancient  custom  of  the  Church  was  "for 
their  reception  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  In  section  10 
the  writer  contends  that  Confirmation  outside  the 
Church  is  impossible.  ''Outside  the  Church  there 
is  no  Holy  Spirit,  sound  faith  moreover  cannot 
exist,  not  alone  among  heretics,  but  even  among 
those  who  are  established  in  schism.  And  for  that 
reason  they  who  repent  and  are  amended  by  the 
doctrine  of  the  truth  ought  to  be  aided  only  by 
spiritual  Baptism,  that  is,  by  Imposition  of  the 
Bishop's  Hands,  and  by  ministration  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Moreover,  the  perfect  seal  of  faith  has 
been  rightly  accustomed  to  be  given  in  this  man- 
ner, and  on  this  principle  in  the  Church." 

Now  if  we  refer  to  the  Confirmation  men- 
tioned in  the  8th  Chap,  of  Acts,  why  did  the  Apos- 
tles go  to  Samaria  ?  Was  it  not  that  they  might 
confer  a  gift  on  the  converts  of  Philip,  which  they 
could  not  otherwise  receive  ?  The  Holy  Ghost  had 
fallen  on  none  of  them.  And  later  on  we  read 
that  the  Apostles  laid  their  hands  on  them  and 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Bomanists.         191 

they  received  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  statement  of 
the  writer  on  the  re-baptism  of  heretics  is,  that 
outside  the  Church  there  is  no  Holy  Spirit,  and 
that  a  penitent  returning  to  the  Church  is  to  be 
reconciled  by  Imposition  of  the  Bishop's  Hands, 
and  by  the  ministration  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

In  what  respect  do  the  Kites  differ  ?  In  either 
case  it  is  ministered  to  men  who  do  not  possess  the 
seven-fold  Spirit,  the  Confirmation  gift.  The 
Rite  in  each  case  is  a  Laying  on  of  Hands,  The 
efficacy  of  the  Rite,  and  the  intention  of  the  Rite, 
is  the  bestowal  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Is  it  not  then 
a  mere  war  of  words  to  contend  that  they  are  not 
identical?  But  there  shall  be  no  question  about 
the  identity  of  the  two  ordinances.  A  perusal  of 
sections  3  and  4  of  the  treatise  shows  conclusively 
that  what  was  intended  by  the  Imposition  of 
Hands  in  the  reconciliation  of  heretics  was  the 
bestowal  of  the  gift  which  the  Apostles  Peter  and 
John  gave  to  the  Samaritans. 

In  Sec.  3  the  writer  argues  that  those  elements 
of  regeneration,  water  and  the  Spirit,  which  ordin- 
arily are  associated  in  the  'New  Testament,  may  be 
sometimes  found  "in  some  sort  divided," — his  aim 
being  to  show,  that  although  heretics  have  not  the 
Spirit,  their  Baptism  should  not  be  repeated  when 
they  return  to  the  Church,  the  spiritual  defect  of 


192  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

the  heretic  being  supplied  by  Confirmation.  He 
quotes  the  case  of  the  Samaritans  who  when  bap- 
tized did  not  receive  the  Spirit,  which  afterwards 
was  conferred  upon  them  by  Imposition  of  the 
Hands  of  the  x\postles.  Then  he  discusses  in  sec- 
tion 4  the  case  of  those  who  have  been  baptized  but 
''depart  from  this  life  without  Imposition  of  the 
Bishop's  Hands."  He  says  there  is  no  doubt  in 
the  Church  regarding  the  salvation  of  such  per- 
sons, although  not  confirmed  they  are  "esteemed 
perfect  believers."  And  he  continues,  "But  if 
thou  admittest  this,  and  believest  it  to  be  saving, 
and  dost  not  gainsay  the  opinion  of  all  the  faith- 
ful, thou  must  needs  confess  this,  that  even  as  this 
principle  proceeds  more  largely  to  be  discussed, 
that  other  also  can  be  more  broadly  established ; 
that  is,  that  by  Imposition  of  Hands  alone,  of  the 
Bishop, — because  baptism  in  the  Xame  of  Jesus 
Christ  has  gone  before  it — may  the  Holy  Spirit 
also  be  given  to  another  man  who  repents  and  be- 
lieves." 

Bearing  in  mind  the  point  which  the  writer  has 
under  discussion,  whether  heretics  should  be  re- 
baptized,  or  that  according  to  "ancient  custom 
hands  only  should  be  laid  on  them  for  their  recep- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  it  is  plain  from  the  above 
([notation  that  he  identifies  this  Rite  with  the  Con- 


The  Re-conjinnation  of  Romanists.         193 

firmation  administered  by  the  Apostles  to  the 
Samaritans.  He  argues  that  the  Spirit  may  some- 
times be  bestowed  in  Baptism,  and  sometimes  in 
the  Laying  on  of  Hands.  He  says  we  do  not 
deny  the  salvation  of  those  baptized  persons  who 
die  unconfirmed;  and  that  the  converse  of  this  is 
true;  that  although  a  person  has  not  received  the 
Spirit  when  he  was  baptized  among  heretics,  yet 
on  his  reception  into  the  Church  the  spiritual 
defect  may  be  fully  remedied  by  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands.  By  this  means  the  Holy  Ghost  will  be 
given  to  them.  His  proof  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
thus  given  is  the  case  of  the  Samaritans  who  had 
been  baptized,  but  had  not  received  the  Spirit. 
The  Spirit  was  bestowed  on  them  by  the  Imposi- 
tion of  the  Hands  of  the  Apostles.  Evidently  this 
writer,  who  so  ably  represented  the  position  of  the 
Roman  party,  had  never  heard  that  there  was  any 
difference  between  Confirmation  and  the  Laying 
on  of  Hands  by  which  heretics  were  reconciled  to 
the  Church;  for  what  an  easy  refutation  of  his 
whole  elaborate  argument  would  it  have  been,  if 
anyone  could  have  urged  that  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands  which  the  Samaritans  received  and  that 
which  was  bestowed  on  heretics  were  not  con- 
sidered identical.  Nothing  in  the  treatise  is  writ- 
ten to  anticipate  any  such  objection,  and  in  all  the 


194  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


letters  of  Cyprian  it  is  never  urged,  for  the  good 
and  sufficient  reason  that  such  a  distinction  was 
never  heard  of  in  the  Church  until  more  than  three 
centuries  later,  when  it  first  appeared  in  the  so- 
called  letter  of  Vigilius  of  Kome. 

When  we  turn  to  the  letters  of  Cyprian,  we 
find  that  he  also  identifies  the  Laying  on  of  Hands 
by  which  heretics  were  reconciled  to  the  Church, 
with  the  Confirmation  which  the  Apostles  admin- 
istered to  the  Samaritans.  In  his  letter  to 
Stephen  (Epistle  71,  Migue's  numbering)  he  says: 
"Those  who  have  been  dipped  abroad  outside  the 
Church,  and  have  been  stained  among  heretics  and 
schismatics  with  the  taint  of  profane  water,  when 
they  come  to  us,  and  to  the  Church,  which  is  one, 
ought  to  be  baptized,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  a  small 
matter  to  lay  hands  on  them  that  they  may  receive 
the  Holy  Ghost  (he  here  quotes  Acts  VIII.  17), 
unless  they  receive  also  the  Baptism  of  the  Church. 
For  then  finally  can  they  be  fully  sanctified  and  be 
the  sons  of  God  if  they  be  born  of  each  Sacra- 
ment." Here  Cyprian  identifies  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands  by  which  Stephen's  party  according  to  the 
ancient  custom  of  the  Church  admitted  heretics  to 
Communion,  with  the  Confirmation  which  the 
Apostles  bestowed  on  the  Samaritans,  but  says  it  is 
not  enough,  the  heretic  must  be  born  of  each  Sacra- 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        195 


ment,  he  must  be  baptized  as  well  as  confirmed. 
In  his  letter  to  Jubaianus  (Epistle  72)  Sec.  6,  he 
says :   "But  if,  according  to  a  perverted  faith,  one 
could  be  baptized  without,  and  obtain  remission  of 
sins,  according  to  the  same  faith  he  could  also 
attain  the  Holy  Spirit ;    and  there  is  no  need  that 
hands  should  be  laid  on  him  when  he  comes  that  he 
might    obtain    the    Holy    Spirit    and  be    sealed. 
Either  he  could  obtain  both  privileges  without  by 
his  faith,  or  he  who  has  been  without  has  received 
neither."     ISTothing  could  be   plainer  than   this. 
Cyprian  argues  that  if  the  heretical  Baptism  is 
valid,  then  the  Confirmation  administered  by  the 
heretical  Bishop  is  valid  too,  and  there  is  no  need 
that  heretics  should  be  confirmed  when  they  are 
received  into  the  Church.     But  assume  that  the 
Laying    on    of    Hands    which    heretics    received 
when    reconciled    to    the    Church,    is    not    Con- 
firmation,  and  what  becomes  of  the   argument? 
It  would  have  no  force  whatever.     In  Sec  9  he 
says :  "In  respect  of  the  assertion  of  some  concern- 
ing those  who  had  been  baptized  in  Samaria,  that 
when    the  Apostles  Peter  and  John    came,  only 
hands    were  imposed    on  them    that  they    might 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  yet  that  they  were  not  re- 
baptized  ;  we  see  that  that  place  does  not  touch  the 
present   case.     Eor   they    who   had    believed   in 


196  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Samaria  had  believed  with  a  true  faith ;  and  with- 
in, in  the  Church  which  is  one,  and  to  which  alone 
it  is  granted  to  bestow  the  grace  of  Baptism  and  to 
remit  sins,  had  been  baptized  by  Philip  the  deacon, 
whom  the  same  Apostles  had  sent.  And  therefore, 
because  they  had  obtained  a  legitimate  and  eccle- 
siastical baptism,  there  was  no  need  that  they 
should  be  baptized  any  more,  but  only  that  which 
was  needed  was  performed  by  Peter  and  John ; 
viz.,  that  prayer  being  made  for  them,  and  hands 
being  imposed,  the  Holy  Spirit  should  be  invoked 
and  poured  out  upon  them,  which  now  too  is  done 
among  us,  so  that  they  who  are  baptized  in  the 
Church  are  brought  to  the  prelates  of  the  Church, 
and  by  our  prayers  and  by  the  Imposition  of 
Hands  obtain  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  are  perfected 
with  the  Lord's  Seal." 

Now  when  the  opponents  of  Cyprian  cited  the 
Confirmation  of  the  Samaritans  as  a  justification 
of  their  custom  of  receiving  heretics  by  the  Impo- 
sition of  Hands,  why  did  he  not  retort  that  the  two 
ceremonies  were  different  things,  that  it  was  Con- 
firmation which  the  Apostles  administered,  where- 
as everybody  knew  that  the  ceremony  by  which 
heretics  were  reconciled  to  the  Church  was  not 
Confirmation.  We  see  he  does  not  make  this  ob- 
jection, but  allows  that  the  two  Rites  are  identical, 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.         197 

for  the  good  and  sufficient  reason  that  no  man  in 
the  Catholic  Church  in  that  day  knew  of  any  dis- 
tinction between  them.  Both  the  African  prelate 
and  the  great  faction  opposed  to  him  looked  on  this 
Laying  on  of  Hands  which  was  bestowed  on  peni- 
tent heretics  as  identical  with  the  Rite  which  was 
administered  to  the  Samaritans  by  the  Apostles. 
From  that  day  onward  the  testimony  of  the 
Church  is  consistent.  In  the  Western  Church 
heretics  are  reconciled  by  the  Laying  on  of  Hands, 
and  in  the  Eastern  Church  by  the  Anointing  with 
the  Holy  Chrism. 

Here  let  me  remark  that  it  is  impossible  to  say 
when  the  custom  of  anointing  the  forehead  with 
the  Chrism  became  part  of  the  Confirmation  Rite. 
Originally  the  anointing  was  part  of  the  ceremony 
of  Baptism.  There  was  an  anointing  of  the  can- 
didate before  Baptism,  and  an  anointing  after  the 
administration  of  that  Sacrament.  In  the  Roman 
Office  of  Baptism  we  find  traces  of  those  an- 
cient ceremonies.  The  infant  before  it  is  bap- 
tized, is  anointed  on  the  breast  and  between  the 
shoulders  with  the  ''Oleum  Catechumenorum," 
and  after  Baptism  it  is  anointed  again  with  the 
Chrism  "in  sumitate  capitis  in  modum  crucis" 
(vid.  Roman  Pontifical).  This  anointing  seems 
in  the  days  of  Cyprian  to  have  had  a  very  subor- 


198  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


dinate  place.  I  think  he  mentions  it  only  once. 
(Epistle  69).  He  says  nothing  about  it  in  connec- 
tion with  Confirmation  in  his  description  of  Con- 
firmation which  I  have  quoted  from  Epistle  72. 
Epistle  75,  Sec.  11  may  serve  also  as  an  illustra- 
tion. "Those  who  patronize  heretics  and  schis- 
matics must  answer  us  whether  they  have  or  have 
not  the  Holy  Ghost.  If  they  have,  why  are  hands 
imposed  on  those  who  are  baptized  among  them 
when  they  come  to  us,  that  they  may  receive  the 
Holy  Ghost,  since  He  must  surely  have  been  re- 
ceived there,  where  if  He  was.  He  could  be  given  ? 
But  if  heretics  and  schismatics  baptized  without, 
have  not  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  therefore  hands  are 
imposed  on  them  among  us,  that  here  may  be  re- 
ceived what  there  neither  is,  nor  can  be  given ;  it  is 
plain,  also,  that  remission  of  sins  cannot  be  given 
by  those  who,  it  is  certain,  have  not  the  Holy  Spirit. 
And  therefore  *  *  *  they  must  all  absolutely  be 
baptized  with  the  Baptism  of  the  Church  who  come 
from  adversaries  and  antichrists  to  the  Church  of 
Christ."  This  passage  bears  witness  to  several 
facts.  It  not  only  clearly  shows  that  the  Laying 
on  of  Hands  which  the  heretics  received  was  Con- 
firmation, but  that  these  heretics  had  the  same 
facilities  for  receiving  heretical  Confirmation  that 
they   had   for  receiving   heretical  Baptism.     His 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        199 

argument  is,  if  you  do  not  baptize  these  heretics 
again,  why  confirm  them,  that  they  may  receive 
the  Holy  Ghost  ?  "Since  He  surely  must  have  been 
received  there,  where  if  He  was,  He  could  be 
given."'  The  Novatian  heresy  then  was  agitating 
the  Church.  Theodoret  some  two  centuries  later 
says:  "The  Novatians  did  not  confer  the  holy 
Chrism  on  those  whom  they  baptized."  And 
Scudamore  in  the  article  "Unction"  ( Smith's  Dic- 
tionary of  Christian  Antiquities)  infers  from  this 
that  the  sect  did  not  confer  Confirmation.  But  in 
the  days  of  Cyprian  there  is  nothing  to  show  that 
the  Chrism  formed  any  part  of  the  Confirmation 
Rite,  and  the  above  passage  bears  witness  that 
these  l^ovatian  heretics  were  confirmed,  but  that 
the  Church  treated  the  Confirmation  as  null  and 
void.  Nothing  is  said  of  the  Chrism  in  this  pas- 
sage. The  means  by  which  the  gift  of  the  Spirit 
is  conveyed  is  the  Imposition  of  Hands.  Ages 
passed  after  the  death  of  Cyprian  before  Unction 
became  a  distinctive  feature  of  the  Confirmation 
Rite  in  the  Western  Church.  Ambrose  in  his 
work  "De  Mysteriis,"  speaks  of  the  Unction  as  a 
part  of  the  "Laver,"  and  after  he  has  left  the  Font 
goes  on  to  speak  of  the  "seal"  and  "perfecting," 
the  expressions  Cyprian  in  the  preceding  century 
had  used  of  the  Imposition  of  Hands  by  which  the 


200  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

seven-fold  Spirit  was  conveyed.  Optatus  (De 
Schism,  Don.  IV.)  says  that  the  water  does  not 
convey  the  gift,  and  the  oil  does  not  convey  it.  It 
makes  the  new  cleansed  soul  ready  to  receive  the 
Spirit  so  that  He  may  be  invoked  to  take  up  His 
abode  in  it  through  the  Laying  on  of  Hands.  It 
is  a  far  cry  from  the  position  of  a  Churchman  in 
the  age  of  Optatus,  to  that  occupied  by  the  Roman 
Pontifical.  ''Confirmo  te  Chrismate  Salutis." 
St.  Augustine  writing  about  a  century  and  a  half 
later  than  Cyprian,  indicates  that  Unction  was 
growing  in  importance,  but  he  associates  it  so 
closely  with  Baptism  that  the  validity  of  the  one 
Rite  implies  the  validity  of  the  other,  so  that  if 
the  one  is  not  to  be  repeated,  neither  need  the  other 
be  repeated,  and  he  nowhere  speaks  of  it  as  part  of 
the  Confirmation  Rite, 

Speaking  of  the  sins  of  men  offering  no  bar  to 
the  grace  of  the  Sacraments  they  administer,  he 
exclaims :  ''How  is  it  that  God  hears  the  invocation 
of  a  murderer  either  over  the  Water  of  Baptism,  or 
over  the  Oil,  or  over  the  Eucharist,  or  over  the 
heads  of  those  M-ho  receive  Imposition  of  the 
Hand  ?"  Here  the  Oil  and  the  Baptism  are  closely 
connected,  while  Confirmation  is  so  distinct  from 
Unction  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  that  he  mentions 
the  Eucharist  between  them.     He  refers  beyond 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        201 

question  to  the  Unction  with  the  Chrism  which 
took  place  immediately  after  the  act  of  Baptism, 
and  as  I  have  shown  above,  holds  that  position  in 
the  Roman  Office  of  Baptism  now.  The  first  clear 
proof  of  the  Chrism  being  used  by  the  Bishops  at 
Confirmation  in  the  Western  Church,  as  distinct 
from  the  Baptismal  Unction  is  said  to  be  found  in 
an  Epistle  of  Innocent,  of  Rome,  A.D.  416. 
(Fleury  Hist.  Eccl.  Bk.  XXIII.  Cap.  32.) 

"Les  pretres  peuvent  bien  faire  aux  baptises 
I'onction  du  chreme,  pourvu  qu'il  soit  consacre  par 
I'eveque ;  mais  ils  n'en  peuvent  pas  marquer  le 
front,  cela  n'est  permis  qu'aux  eveques,  quand  ils 
donnent  le  S.  Esprit."  I  have  not  the  original 
before  me,  and  so  I  give  the  statement  of  this 
accurate  historian.  It  hardly  bears  out  the  gen^ 
eral  assertion  that  the  application  of  the  Chrism 
dates  from  this  period.  Wliether  the  Chrism  was 
used  in  making  the  sign  of  the  cross  on  the  fore- 
head the  extract  does  not  say.  At  all  events  the 
innovation  did  not  at  once  become  popular  in  the 
Western  Church.  The  first  Council  of  Orange,  A. 
D.  441,  ordered  that  Chrism  should  not  be  admin- 
istered at  Confirmation,  unless  from  some  neces- 
sary cause  it  had  been  omitted  at  Baptism.  (First 
Council  Orange  Can.  II.)  The  second  Council  of 
Aries,  A.D.  452,  also  adopted  this  decree,  and  even 


202  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

as  far  on  as  the  time  of  Alcuin,  writers  in  describ- 
ing Confirmation  often  mention  only  the  Laying 
on  of  Hands  and  say  nothing  about  Unction. 

Thus,  Alcuin  says,  "iSTovissime  per  imposi- 
tionem  manus  a  summo  sacerdote  septiformis 
gratiae  Spiritum  accepit." 

This  fact  must  be  borne  in  mind.  The  Chrism 
only  became  a  part  of  the  Confirmation  Rite  in  the 
Western  Churches  at  a  comparatively  late  date. 
As  I  have  shown  it  was  looked  upon  as  a  part  of 
Baptism  for  generations  after  Cyprian's  day ;  and 
when  the  innovation  was  introduced  some  time  in 
the  5th  century,  it  was  frequently  resisted,  and 
actually  forbidden  by  the  decrees  of  provincial 
councils.  We  therefore  are  not  to  think,  that  in 
any  of  the  directions  regarding  the  re-confirmation 
of  heretics,  anything  was  wanting  to  the  complete- 
ness of  the  Rite,  because  it  is  not  ordered  that  they 
should  receive  the  Chrism  as  well  as  the  Laying  on 
of  Hands.  As  soon  as  the  Chrism  became  a  part 
of  the  Rite  of  Confirmation,  heretics  returning  to 
the  Communion  of  the  Church  received  it,  as  well 
as  Imposition  of  Hands.  I  think  I  have  shown, 
beyond  question,  that  in  Cyprian's  day  there  was 
no  distinction  whatever  between  an  ordinary  Con- 
firmation and  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  by  which 
heretics  were  reconciled  to  the  Church. 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        203 

The  Rite  was  administered  for  the  same  pur- 
pose in  either  case:  to  bestow  the  seven-fold  gift 
of  the  Spirit.  It  was  held  that  heretics  did  not 
have  the  Spirit,  and  therefore  could  not  give  the 
Spirit.  Their  Confirmation,  therefore,  was  null 
and  void,  and  must  be  repeated.  We  know 
Cyprian  contended  it  was  not  enough  to  re-confirm 
the  heretic,  he  insisted,  also,  on  re-baptism.  But 
the  mind  of  the  Church  was  that  Cyprian  was  in 
error.  The  ancient  custom,  against  which  he  so 
vigorously  protested,  remained  the  rule,  that  the 
heretic  should  be  reconciled  to  the  Church  by  Con- 
firmation. Before  turning  from  the  clear  testi- 
mony of  this  writer,  which  seems  to  me  to  show 
conclusively  that  the  re-confirmation  of  the  heretic 
is  the  ancient  custom  and  rule  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  I  will  quote  from  his  letter  to  Firmilian 
(Epistle  74).  In  section  8  he  cites  the  case  of 
those  disciples  at  Ephesus  to  whom  St.  Paul 
ordered  Christian  Baptism  to  be  administered  and 
then  confirmed  them,  and  he  goes  on  to  say: 
"But  what  kind  of  a  thing  is  it,  that  when  we  see 
that  Paul  after  John's  baptism,  baptized  his  dis- 
ciples again,  we  are  hesitating  to  baptize  those  who 
come  to  the  Church  from  heresy  after  their  unhal- 
lowed and  profane  dipping.  Unless,  perchance, 
Paul  was  inferior  to  the  Bishops  of  these  times,  so 


204  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


that  these  indeed  can  by  Imposition  of  Hands 
alone  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  those  heretics  who 
come  (to  the  Church),  while  Paul  was  not  fitted  to 
give  the  Holy  Spirit  by  Imposition  of  Hands  to 
those  who  had  been  baptized  by  John,  unless  he 
had  first  baptized  them  also  with  the  baptism  of 
the  Church."  I  think  there  is  no  possibility  of 
avoiding  the  conclusion,  that  if  it  was  Confirma- 
tion St.  Paul  gave  to  the  men  of  Ephesus,  then  it 
was  bv  Confirmation  that  heretics  were  received  by 
the  Church  in  the  days  of  Cyprian. 

Neither  he  nor  his  adversaries  ever  dreamed 
of  the  easy  refutation  of  each  other's  arguments 
which  would  have  resulted  from  the  simple  denial 
of  the  identity  of  the  two  ceremonies.  That  was 
reserved  for  a  later  generation  which  had  been  mis- 
led by  a  Roman  novelty,  and  tempted  to  forget  a 
Catholic  principle.  It  will  suffice  to  show  that  the 
ancient  custom  of  re-confirming  heretics  obtained 
in  the  Church  for  fully  two  hundred  years  after 
Cyprian's  contest  with  Stephen,  as  the  unques- 
tioned rule.  At  the  Council  of  Aries  held  some 
sixty  years  after  Cyprian's  death,  it  was  decreed 
(Canon  8)  that  when  heretics  who  had  been  bap- 
tized in  the  Name  of  the  Trinity  returned  to  the 
Church  they  should  be  reconciled  by  Imposition  of 
Hands,  that  they  might  receive  the  Holy  Spirit. 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        205 

Siriciiis,  Bishop  of  Rome  A.D.  384,  in  his  let- 
ter to  Himerius,  Bishop  of  Tarragona,  orders  that 
converts  from  Arianism  should  not  be  re-baptized, 
but  attached  to  the  Catholic  Communion  by  means 
of  the  invocation  of  the  seven-fold  Spirit  only,  by 
Imposition  of  the  Bishop's  Hand.  "Per  invoca- 
tionem  solam  septiformis  Spiritus  episcopalis 
manus  impositione."  Fleury's  comment  is, 
"C'est-a-dire  qu'on  leur  donnera  la  confirmation." 
Canon  Mason  says:  "It  is  but  a  dispute  about 
words  when  it  is  debated  whether  such  an  act  is,  or 
is  not  Confirmation.  The  seven-fold  Spirit  is  the 
Confirmation  Gift." 

Pope  Innocent  writing  to  Alexander,  of  An- 
tioch,  A.D.  415,  says  that  the  Arians  are  to  be 
received  into  the  Church  by  Imposition  of  Hands 
to  give  them  the  Holy  Spirit  (Fleury  Bk.  23. 
Cap.  26).  His  reason  is  the  same  that  was  urged 
in  Cyprian's  age.  Heretics  could  not  confer 
grace.  St.  Augustine,  A.D.,  354-430,  in  his 
writings  against  the  Donatists  asserts  in  many 
places  that  heretics  whose  Baptism  is  valid  are  to 
be  reconciled  to  the  Church  by  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands  that  they  may  receive  the  Holy  Spirit.  In 
Bk.  III.  Cap.  16,  he  declares  that  the  Spirit  can- 
not be  received  outside  the  Catholic  Church;  he 
cites  the  case  of  Simon  Magus,  who  had  the  Sacra- 


206  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


ment  without  the  operation  of  the  Spirit,  and  con- 
cludes that  whatever  may  be  received  by  the  here- 
tics and  schismatics  they  cannot  have  the  gift  of 
charity.     "At  any  rate  outside  the  bond  (of  the 
Church)  that  love  cannot  exist,  without  which,  all 
other  requisites,  even  if  they  can  be  recognized  and 
approved,  cannot  profit,  or  release  from  sin.     But 
the  Laying  on  of  Hands  is  not  like  Baptism  in- 
capable of  repetition."     In  Bk.  V.  Cap.  23  he  says 
that  heretics  have  not  the  Church  and  have  not  the 
Holy  Spirit,  but  they  have  Baptism,  and  he  insists 
that  they  shall  be  received  by  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands.     In  these  letters  we  must  remember  that 
Augustine  is  continually  commenting  on  the  writ- 
ings of  Cyprian.     iSJ'owhere  does  he  hint  that  the 
ancient  custom  of  the  Church  had  changed,  or  that 
the  Laying  on  of  Hands  by  which  heretics  were 
received  in  Cyprian's  age,  and  which  that  prelate 
considered  identical  with  the  Rite  ministered  by 
Peter  and  John  at  Samaria  and  by  Paul  at  Ephe- 
sus,  had  acquired  a  new  significance.     The  Laying 
on  of  Hands  is  still  given,  to  confer  the  Holy 
Spirit,  for  outside  the  Church  the  Spirit  is  not, 
and  so  the  heretical  Confirmation  is  void. 

Jerome,  A.  D.  340-420,  is  our  next  witness. 
This  eminent  writer,  in  his  dialogue  with  the 
Luciferian,  had  a  full  opportunity  to  deny  that 


The  Re-conjinnation  of  Romanists.        207 

there  was  any  identity  between  the  Rite  practised 
by  Luciferians  in  receiving  heretics,  and  the  Rite 
practised  by  Catholic  Bishops  in  completion  of 
Baptisms  bestowed  by  Catholic  presbyters.  But 
he  does  nothing  of  the  kind.  He  evidently  knows 
of  no  distinction  between  the  penitential  and  the 
confirmatory  Laying  on  of  Hands.  The  passage 
is  too  long  to  be  quoted  in  full.  (Vid.  sections 
6-10). 

The  Luciferians,  let  us  remember,  were  ex- 
treme Churchmen,  who,  while  accepting  as  valid 
the  Baptism  conferred  by  Arian  Bishops,  refused 
to  acknowledge  the  Bishops  who  had  repented  of 
Arian  opinions.  The  object  of  the  dialogue  is  to 
show  their  inconsistency.  We  are  not  to  imagine 
that  Jerome  himself  advocated  the  re-baptism  of 
Arians,  but  he  strives  to  prove  that  the  Luciferian 
is  bound  to  reject  the  Baptism  if  he  will  not  admit 
the  penitent  Bishop.  The  Luciferian  says,"When 
I  receive  a  lay  penitent  (from  the  Arians),  it  is 
with  Laying  on  of  Hands,  and  invocation  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  for  I  know  that  the  Holy  Spirit  can- 
not be  given  by  heretics."  Jerome  (Orthodoxus) 
insists  that  the  Arians  must  also  be  re-baptized. 
The  Luciferian  cites  the  case  of  the  men  of  Ephe- 
sus  who  had  been  baptized,  and  yet  knew  not  that 
there  was  any  Holy  Ghost,  to  show  that  a  person 


208  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

might  be  baptized  and  yet  not  possess  the  Spirit. 
Jerome  answers  that  the  baptism  of  John  was  not 
Christian  Baptism,  and  that  these  persons  were 
baptized   again   before    St.    Paul   would   confirm 
them,  and  adds,  '*Do  you  follow  the  Apostles,  and 
baptize  those  who  have  not  had  Christian  Baptism, 
and  you  will  be  able  to  invoke  the  Holy  Ghost." 
The  Luciferian  retorts.  See.  8,  "Don't  you  know 
that  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  after  Baptism,  and 
then  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  a  custom 
of    the    Churches?     Do    you    demand    Scripture 
proof  ?       You  may  find  it  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles.      So  you  see  we  follow  the  practice  of  the 
Churches,  although  it  may  be  clear  that  a  person 
was  baptized  before  the  Spirit  was  invoked."    Jer- 
ome rejoins :  "I  do  not  deny  that  it  is  the  practice 
of  the  Church  in  the  case  of  those  baptized  by  pres- 
byters and  deacons  for  the  Bishop  to  visit  them, 
and  by  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  to  invoke  the  Holy 
Ghost  upon  them.     But  how  shall  I  describe  your 
habit  of  applying  the  laws  of  the  Church  to  here- 
tics ?     If  a  Bishop  lays  his  hands  on  men,  he  lays 
them  on  those  who  have  been  baptized  in  the  right 
faith,  but  an  Arian  has  no  faith     *     *     *     how 
then  can  he  receive  the  Holy  Ghost  who  has  not  yet 
obtained  remission  of  sins?" 

We  see  that  in  this  dialogue  both  Jerome  and 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        209 

his  opponent  allow  that  the  Laying  on  of  Hands, 
by  which  the  Luciferian  says  he  reconciles  here- 
tics, is  the  same  Rite  as  that  by  which  the  Bishops 
complete  the  Baptisms  performed  by  the  presby- 
ters of  the  Church,  and  for  which  authority  is  to 
be  found  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

Neither  of  them  demurs  in  the  slightest  degree 
to  this  complete  identification  of  the  penitential 
Laying  on  of  Hands  with  Confirmation.  Farther 
on  in  Section  9,  Jerome  quotes  the  Confirmation  at 
Samaria:  "Then  laid  they  their  hands  on  them, 
and  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  he  adds, 
"and  if  you  here  say  that  you  do  the  same,  because 
the  heretics  have  not  baptized  into  the  Holy  Ghost, 
I  must  remind  you  that  Philip  was  not  separated 
from  the  Church."  Why  did  not  Jerome  tell  his 
opponent  that  the  Confirmation  given  to  the 
Samaritans  and  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  by  which 
heretics  were  reconciled  were  not  the  same  ?  The 
reason  is  that  he  lived  too  early  to  be  able  to  do  so. 
The  fraudulent  so-called  letter  of  Vigilius  in 
which  for  the  first  time  the  penitential  Laying  on 
of  Hands  is  declared  to  be  a  different  thing  from 
Confirmation,  was  not  written  until  more  than  a 
century  had  elapsed  after  Jerome  had  fallen 
asleep.  ISTo  testimony  surely  can  be  more  conclus- 
ive than  the  voice  of  this  eminent  theologian  and 
doctor  of  the  Church. 


210         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


I  close  my  illustrations  of  the  custom  of  the 
Western  Church  by  quoting  the  decrees  of  the  pro- 
vincial Councils  of  Orange,  Aries  and  Epone. 

The  1st  Council  of  Orange,  Canon  I.,  says  that 
heretics  at  the  point  of  death,  desiring  to  be  re- 
ceived into  the  Church,  if  the  Bishop  is  absent, 
shall  be  reconciled  by  presbyters,  with  the  Chrism 
and  the  Laying  on  of  Hands.  The  second  Council 
of  Aries  orders  certain  heretics,  who  have  been 
baptized  in  the  Name  of  the  Trinity,  to  be  received 
into  the  Church  with  the  Chrism  and  the  Laying 
on  of  Hands.  The  Council  of  Epone,  Canon 
XVI.,  makes  the  same  provision  that  I  have 
quoted  above  from  the  decrees  of  Orange,  adding 
that  heretics  in  health  must  go  to  the  Bishop. 
Here  we  note  that  the  re-Confirmation  of  heretics 
and  schismatics  was  considered  more  necessary 
than  the  Confirmation  of  those  who  had  been  bap- 
tized in  the  Church.  For,  as  Jerome  remarks  in 
his  dialogue  with  the  Luciferian  (Sec.  9),  many 
who  were  baptized  in  the  Church  died  before  the 
Bishop  could  give  them  Confirmation,  yet  no  rule 
was  made  allowing  presbyters  to  confirm  such  per- 
sons in  time  of  extremity.  The  reason  was  that 
the  baptized  in  the  Church  had  received  the  grace 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  Baptism,  and  there  was  not 
the  same  absolute  necessity  for  their  Confirmation 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        211 

as  existed  in  the  case  of  heretics.  For  heretics 
had  not  the  Spirit,  and  could  not  confer  grace, 
either  in  the  Baptism  or  in  the  Confirmation  ad- 
ministered by  them.  The  first  Council  of  Orange 
was  held  A.D.  441 ;  the  second  Council  of  Aries, 
A.D.  452;  the  Council  of  Epone,  A.D.  517. 

The  Chrism  having  become  part  of  the  Con- 
firmation Rite,  in  the  5th  century,  in  the  Western 
Church,we  note  that  it  forms  part  of  the  ceremony 
by  which  heretics  are  admitted  to  the  Communion. 
So  far  I  have  dealt  with  the  ancient  custom  of  the 
Western  Church. 

In  the  Eastern  Church  the  Confirmation  Rite 
was  corrupted  at  an  early  day,  so  that  the  Laying 
on  of  Hands,  practically,  was  completely  obscured. 
Cyril,  A.D.  318-380,  in  his  catechetical  lectures, 
has  nothing  to  say  about  the  Imposition  of  Hands, 
He  mentions  the  Mysteries  in  this  order :  Baptism, 
the  Chrism  and  the  First  Communion.  In  lecture 
21,  "On  Chrism,"  he  describes  the  Eastern  mode 
of  Confirmation.  The  ointment  is  applied  to  the 
forehead,  ears,  nostrils  and  breast,  implying  that 
the  soul  is  sanctified  by  the  holy  and  life-giving 
Spirit.  When  the  innovation  began  we'  cannot 
say,  but  anointing  with  the  Chrism  had  become  in 
Cyril's  day  the  expression  in  the  Eastern  Church 
for  Confirmation  or  the  Laying  on  of  Hands.    But 


212  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

the  custom  was  the  same  as  in  the  West  in  regard 
to  the  reconciliation  of  heretics.  They  were  con- 
firmed when  they  returned  to  the  Church. 

The  second  General  Council  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  held  in  Constantinople  A.D.  381,  directs 
(Canon  VII.)  that  heretics  validly  baptized  are 
to  be  reconciled  to  the  Church  with  the  precise  rit- 
ual acts  and  words  of  Confirmation.  They  are  to 
be  anointed  with  the  Chrism  on  the  forehead,  eyes, 
nostrils,  mouth  and  ears,  the  officiant  saying,  "The 
seal  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  This  is  the 
Eastern  mode  of  administering  Confirmation,  even 
to-day.  Bright,  in  his  notes,  objects  to  the  form  of 
this  Canon,  and  insists  that  it  is  part  of  a  letter, 
describing  the  custom  of  the  Church  at  Constanti- 
nople. But  I  am  not  concerned  with  the  question 
of  its  binding  authority  on  the  whole  Church,  I 
quote  it  because  of  its  conclusive  testimony  as  to 
the  ancient  tradition  in  the  Eastern  Church  con- 
cerning the  reconciliation  of  heretics.  Like  every 
other  voice  of  antiquity,  it  declares  that  they  are 
to  be  confirmed.  The  Council  of  Laodicea 
(Canon  VII.)  declares  that  those  heretics  whose 
Baptism  is  formally  complete  are  to  renounce  their 
former  heresies,  to  learn  the  Catholic  Creed,  and 
to  be  anointed  with  the  holy  Chrism,  and  then  ad- 
mitted to  the  Holy  Communion.     St.  Basil  directs 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        213 


that  the  members  of  certain  heretical  sects,  on  re- 
pentance, are  to  be  anointed  by  the  faithful,  and 
so  approach  the  holy  mysteries.  Justin  Martyr 
(Pseudo)  in  his  questions  and  responses,  says  to 
the  question  why  the  Baptism  of  a  penitent  heretic 
is  allowed:  "When  a  heretic  comes  over  to  the 
Catholic  faith,  the  fault  of  his  heterodoxy  is  cor- 
rected by  the  change  of  his  opinion,  and  the  f  aulti- 
ness  of  his  baptism  by  the  Unction  of  the  Holy 
Chrism."  Finally,  the  Quiuisext  Council,  or 
Council  in  Trullo,  re-affirmed  the  decree  of  the  sec- 
ond Council,  A.D.  381,  only  adding  the  Paulini  to 
the  list  of  those  heretics  whose  defective  baptism 
must  be  repeated. 

Farther  testimony  concerning  the  rule  and  cus- 
tom of  the  Eastern  Church  seems  unnecessary,  for 
these  voices  are  authoritative  and  final.  The  here- 
tic was  to  be  reconciled  with  the  ritual  acts  and 
words  of  Eastern  Confirmation.  We  have  now 
traced  the  custom  of  the  Catholic  Church  from  the 
age  of  Cyprian  A.D.  250,  to  the  sixth  century.  I 
cannot  find  that  anywhere  there  is  any  difference 
mentioned  between  Confirmation  and  the  Kite  by 
which  heretics  were  reconciled  to  the  Church. 
The  ritual  of  Confirmation  varied  according  to 
time  and  place,  and  the  ceremony  by  which  here- 
tics were  admitted  into  the  Church  varied  with  it. 


214         Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

Thus  in  the  Western  Church  A.D.  250,  Cy- 
prian describes  Confirmation  thus  (Epistle  72, 
Sec.  9)  :  "Thev  who  are  baptized  in  the  Church  are 
brought  to  the  prelates  of  the  Church,  and  by  our 
prayers  and  by  the  Imposition  of  Hands  obtain  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  are  perfected  with  the  Lord's 
Seal."  As  that  was  the  mode  of  Confirmation  at 
that  time,  heretics  were  reconciled  by  Imposition 
of  Hands. 

In  the  5th  century  in  the  Western  Church,  the 
anointing  with  the  Chrism  had  become  part  of  the 
Confirmation  Rite,  and  so  we  find  Councils  order- 
ing that  heretics  are  to  be  received  with  the 
Chrism  and  Laying  on  of  Hands.  In  the  Eastern 
Church,  anointing  with  the  Chrism  had  become 
the  confirming  act,  and  heretics  are  to  be  recon- 
ciled there  by  anointing  them  with  the  Chrism, 
and  repeating  over  them  the  Eastern  confirming 
sentence,  "The  seal  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 
Over  and  over  again  the  great  men  of  the  past  com- 
pare this  ritual  act  by  which  heretics  were  recon- 
ciled with  the  two  cases  of  Confirmation  mentioned 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  as  if  there  was  no 
distinction  between  them.  I  can  come  to  only  one 
conclusion.  It  is  the  rule  of  the  Catholic  Church 
that  the  heretic  should  be  re-confirmed  when  he  is 
received  into  the  Church.     I  know  that  there  is  a 


The  Be-confirmation  of  Romanists.        215 

widespread  opinion  that  the  penitential  Laying  on 
of  Hands  by  which  the  heretic  was  reconciled  was 
not  a  Confirmation.  But  I  think  it  is  opposed  to 
the  plain  testimony  of  antiquity,  and  it  seems  to 
me  that  it  had  not  a  very  respectable  origin. 

Canon  Mason,  in  his  work  on  the  relation  of 
Baptism  to  Confirmation,  says,  p.  180,  "The  ear- 
liest attempt  to  distinguish  between  the  Confirma- 
tory and  the  penitential  Laying  on  of  Hands — if 
the  document  is  genuine — occurs  in  an  epistle  pur- 
porting to  be  by  Vigilius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D. 
538,"  which  says  of  men  who  had  received  Arian 
Baptism,  "But  their  reconciliation  does  not  take 
effect  (operatur — perhaps  in  late  Latin,  'is  not 
effected')  by  means  of  that  imposition  of  the  hand 
which  takes  place  through  (per)  invocation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  but  by  means  of  that  imposition 
whereby  the  fruit  of  penitence  is  acquired,  and  the 
restoration  of  the  Holy  Communion  is  performed." 
But  there  is  grave  reason  to  discredit  the  docu- 
ment. It  exists  in  more  than  one  form,  and  has 
certainly  been  largely  interpolated  in  the  interests 
di  the  Roman  See.  It  is  alleged  to  be  the  same 
letter  which  was  read  aloud  at  the  first  Council  of 
Braga  (A.D.  561),  addressed  by  the  See  of  Rome 
to  Profuturus,  formerly  Bishop  of  Braga.  But, 
on  the  one  hand,  there  is  nothing  to  prove  that  the 


216  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


letter  read  there  was  written  by  Vigilius,  or  that 
Profuturiis  was  contemporary  with  him;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  several  ancient  copies  of  our  letter 
appear  to  be  addressed  "ad  Eutherium,"  without 
mention  of  his  see.  The  contents  of  the  epistle  as 
we  have  it  do  not  tally  with  what  appear  to  have 
been  the  contents  of  the  letter  read  at  Braga.  And 
finally,  the  epistle  seems  not  to  have  been  known  to 
Isidore  of  Seville,  which  could  hardly  have  been 
the  case  had  it  been  the  letter  read  at  Braga.  Part 
of  the  letter  may  be  genuine,  but  the  sentence 
quoted  bears  every  sign  of  being  modern. 

The  criticism  of  this  learned  and  cautious 
writer  needs  no  comment.  The  first  attempt  t*^ 
deny  that  the  ceremony  by  which  heretics  were  re- 
ceived into  the  Church  was  Confirmation,  seems 
to  have  been  a  forgery,  and  an  exceedingly  clumsy 
one,  too.  For  all  the  statements  concerning  the 
reconciliation  of  heretics  expressly  say  that 
Laying  on  of  Hands  as  in  the  Western  Church,  or 
the  Chrism  as  in  the  Eastern  Church,  is  bestowed 
on  the  heretic  that  the  Holy  Spirit  may  be  invoked 
and  poured  out  on  him.  The  treatise  on  the  re- 
Baptism  of  heretics  which  represented  the  views  of 
Stephen,  the  opponent  of  Cyprian,  says  that  "the 
most  ancient  custom  and  tradition  of  the  Church 
is  that  only  hands  should  be  laid  on  them  by  the 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        217 

Bishop  for  their  reception  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
Cyprian  (Letter  75)  says,  "Heretics  and  schismat- 
ics have  not  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  therefore  hands 
are  imposed  on  them  among  iis,  that  here  may  be 
received  what  there  neither  is,  nor  can  be  given." 
The  Council  of  Aries  commands  that  heretics  who 
have  been  baptized  in  the  Name  of  the  Trinity, 
when  they  return  to  the  Church,  be  reconciled  by 
Imposition  of  Hands,  that  they  may  receive  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Siricius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  com- 
mands that  Arians  returning  to  the  Church,  be 
attached  to  the  Catholic  Communion  "Per  invoca- 
tionem  solam  septiformis  Spiritus  episcopalis 
manus  impositione."  Pope  Innocent  declares 
that  Arians  are  to  be  received  into  the  Church  by 
the  Imposition  of  Hands  to  give  them  the  Holy 
Spirit.  St.  Augustine  declares  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  cannot  be  received  outside  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  therefore  the  heretic  must  receive  the 
Laying  on  of  Hands.  Jerome  says  that  the  peni- 
tent heretic  is  to  be  received  by  Laying  on  of 
Hands  and  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  for 
the  Holy  Spirit  cannot  be  given  by  heretics.  Leo, 
Bishop  of  Rome,  Epistle  159,  says,  "Those  who 
received  Baptism  from  heretics  are  to  be  confirmed 
by  invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  only,  through  the 
Imposition  of  Hands   (sola  invocatione   Spiritus 


218  Fundametital  Church  Principles. 


Sancti  per  impositionem  manuum  confirmandi 
sunt),  because  they  have  but  the  form  of  Baptism 
without  its  sanctifying  power.  The  Eastern 
Church  decrees  that  the  heretic  is  to  receive  the 
Chrism  with  the  words/'The  seal  of  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit." 

But  this  so-called  letter  of  Vigilius,  which 
Canon  Mason  thinks  ''bears  every  sign"  of  being  a 
forgery,  informs  us  ''Their  reconciliation  does  not 
take  effect  by  means  of  that  Imposition  of  the 
Hand  which  takes  place  through  invocation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  Whom,  then,  shall  we  follow? 
Shall  we  hear  the  Church  during  the  first  six  cen- 
turies, or  shall  we  listen  to  this  tainted  witness  that 
comes  forth  some  time  in  the  sixth  or  seventh  cen- 
tury, from  that  source  which  you  well  denounce 
"the  mother  of  schisms  and  the  mistress  of 
heresy,"  and  flatly  contradicts  the  unanimous  voice 
of  the  Earlv  Church,  and  endeavors  to  teach  us  a 
new  way?  The  choice,  surely,  is  not  difficult  to 
make.  It  seems  to  me  that  we  will  be  following 
the  ancient  custom  of  the  Church  if  we  insist  that 
the  Koman  heretic,  whether  clerical  or  lay,  who 
desires  admission  to  our  Communion  shall  be  re- 
conciled to  the  Church  by  Confirmation. 

In  your  Pastoral  Letter  you  remark  that  "If 
any  one  needs  purging  and  reconciling  from  the 


The  Ee-confirmation  of  Romanists.        219 

sins  of  heresy  and  schism  it  is  the  Roman  Catholic 
returning  to  Catholicity."  In  saying  this,  I  be- 
lieve you  are  accurately  expressing  the  mind  of 
the  American  Church.  It  has  been  said  that  Rome 
excommunicated  England,  and  not  England 
Rome.  And  English  writers,  when  commenting 
on  Roman  errors,  often  speak  as  if  the  English 
Church  could  not  exactly  decide  how  far  Rome 
had  gone  on  the  way  to  heresy.  The  errors  were 
very  dangerous.  Rome  had  gone  very  far  in  the 
way  of  evil ;  but  still,  such  was  the  excessive  char- 
ity of  the  Anglican  Church,  it  could  not  say 
plainly  that  the  Roman  Church  was  in  heresy. 
And  it  is  supposed  by  many  of  us,  that  while  the 
mind  of  the  English  Church  is  still  in  this  state  of 
hesitating  indecision,  the  American  Church  waits 
for  the  voice  of  the  mother  with  filial  respect, 
before  pronouncing  any  final  opinion  regarding 
Roman  heresy.  But  such  statements  are  mislead- 
ing. If  a  man's  hands  are  tied  behind  his  back, 
there  is  some  other  reason  besides  a  sentimental 
weakness  for  a  sinner  which  prevents  him  from 
chastising  him ;  or  if  the  tongue  of  a  witness  is  cut 
out,  it  would  be  a  shame  to  accuse  him  of  unwill- 
ingness to  bear  testimony  for  the  truth,  when 
really  he  is  unable  to  do  so.  And  how,  indeed,  is 
the  Church  of  England  to  denounce  any  heresy. 


220  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

whether  it  originates  in  Rome,  or  elsewhere,  when 
for  335  years  it  has,  by  the  laws  imposed  on  it, 
been  expressly  forbidden  to  do  so  ?  Here  is  the  law 
of  the  Church  of  England : 

April  29,  1559,  an  act  was  passed  "for  restor- 
ing to  the  Crown  the  ancient  jurisdiction  over  the 
State,  Ecclesiastical  and  Spiritual,  and  abolishing 
all  foreign  powers  repugnant  to  the  same."  This 
Supremacy  Act  empowers  the  Queen  to  appoint 
visitors  to  "visit,  reform,  redress,  order,  correct 
and  amend  all  such  errors,  heresies,  schisms, 
abuses,  offences,  contempts  and  enormities,  which 
by  any  manner,  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical,  power, 
authority  or  jurisdiction  can,  or  may  be,  lawfully 
reformed,  ordered,  redeemed,  corrected  or  amend- 
ed." In  the  act  there  is  this  important  proviso: 
No  person  appointed  by  the  Crown  to  execute 
spiritual  jurisdiction  shall  have  power  to  deter- 
mine any  matter  to  he  heresy, except  what  has  been 
adjudged  to  be  heresy  by  the  canonical  Scriptures, 
or  by  any  of  the  first  four  General  Councils,  or 
any  other  General  Council,  or  "shall  be  ordered, 
judged  or  determined  to  be  heresy  by  the  high 
court  of  Parliament  of  the  realm,  with  the  assent 
of  the  clergy  in  their  convocations,  anything  in  the 
Act  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding."  That  is 
the  restraint  which  silences  the  voice  of  the  Church 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        221 

of  England  with  regard  to  heresy.  It  would, 
indeed,  be  a  note  of  contempt  against  that  venerable 
Apostolic  Communion  if  one  could  truthfully  say 
that  it  had  lost  the  power  to  distinguish  between 
truth  and  error,  or  that  God,  having  set  it  in  its 
place  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth,  and  plainly  to  re- 
buke sin,  it  had  refused  to  do  so  because  of  a  senti- 
mental weakness  for  the  sinner,  which  it  was 
bound  to  judge  and  condemn.  But  this  is  not  the 
truth.  The  Church  of  England  does  not  speak 
because  its  voice  is  stifled,  and  it  cannot  speak. 

For,  of  course,  when  the  English  parliament 
was  constituted  the  authority,  which  must  first 
determine  any  matter  to  be  heresy,  before  Convoca- 
tion could  even  assent  to  the  conclusion,  the  whole 
subject  was  consigned  to  a  ridiculous  and  impos- 
sible court.  It  does  not  make  the  matter  any  bet- 
ter to  say  that  the  Church  and  the  nation  of  Eng- 
land were  supposed  to  be  conterminate,  the  Eng- 
lish parliament  from  its  very  nature  was  never 
competent  to  decide  on  any  article  of  faith. 

But  while  the  English  Church  has  been  com- 
pelled to  keep  silence,  the  American  Church  has 
spoken.  It  has  not,  indeed,  formally  denounced 
any  Roman  heresy,  by  name,  but  it  has  deliber- 
ately assumed  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
is    no    longer    in    communion    with    the    Church 


222  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 


Catholic.      In   Canon   XV.,   Title  I.,   the  Amer- 
ican   Church,    through    its    House    of    Bishops 
and  its  House  of  Deputies,  takes  this  position. 
The  Canon  is  designated,  "Of  the  Admission  of 
Ministers  ordained  by  Bishops  not  in  Communion 
with  this  Church."     This  designation  applies  to 
Bishops  of  the  Roman  Communion  ;  and  where  the 
Bishop  is,  there  is  the  Church.     It  is  not  in  Com- 
munion with  this  Church.     That  is  the  deliberate 
conclusion  of  the  American  Church.     It  can  mean 
only  one  thing,  that  the  Roman  Church  is  in  her- 
esy.    For  this  Church  did  not  intend  to  unchurch 
itself  by  that  declaration.     It  believes  that  it  is 
in  the  Communion  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  it 
could  not  use  that  expression  of  any  portion  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  however  remote.     For  example 
we  can  imagine  some  colored  convert  of  the  Uni- 
versities' Mission  in  the  heart  of  Africa,  becom- 
ing a  Bishop  of  the  Church  in  the  Dark  Conti- 
nent, but  although  he  may  never  have  seen  an 
American  Churchman,  may  never  have  had  any 
opportunity  of  ministering  at  our  Altars,  or  of 
communing  with  us,  yet  we  believe  such  a  person 
has  full  Communion  with  us,  and  we  would  accept 
the  Orders  given  by  him  to  a  priest,  as  readily  as 
if  the  ordination  had  been  performed  by  the  Met- 
ropolitan of  Canterbury.     He  would  not  be  des- 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.        223 


ignated  "a  Bishop  not  in  Communion  with  this 
Church."  iSTor  would  we  use  such  an  expression 
of  one  of  the  faithful  dead.  We  would  not  say,  of 
St.  Paul,  or  St.  Jerome,  that  in  their  places,  among 
the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect,  they  are  not 
in  Communion  with  this  Church.  For  the  Com- 
munion of  Saints  is  part  of  our  Creed. 

No  matter  how  remote  in  time,  or  in  the  cir- 
cumstances of  geographical  position  any  portion 
of  the  Catholic  Church  may  be,  yet  the  Church  is 
one,  and  as  part  of  the  Catholic  Church  we  have 
Communion  with  it.  But  the  American  Church 
in  Convention,  deliberately  places  the  fact  on  rec- 
ord that  the  Roman  Catholic  is  not  in  Communion 
with  this  Church.  What  is  this,  but  to  say  that 
the  Romanist  is  in  heresy  ? 

What  is  needed,  is  that  the  American  Bishops 
should  specify  and  condemn  those  heresies  which 
Rome  holds  and  teaches.  They  have  been  called 
to  their  high  position  that  they  might  bear  witness 
to  the  truth  and  warn  men  against  error. 

The  ignorant,  the  foolish,  and  the  disloyal,  who 
are  to  be  found  in  every  great  army,  need  to  be 
told  that  the  Church  has  condemned  as  heresies 
the  dangerous  errors  of  Rome,  and  that  the  man 
who  holds  them,  much  more  the  minister  who 
teaches  them,  puts  himself  outside  the  Commu- 
nion of  the  Catholic  Church. 


224  Fundamental  Church  Principles. 

We  may  be  told  that  we  must  not  act  precipi- 
tately, but  must  wait  for  concerted  action  on  the 
part  of  the  Anglican  Church.  But  I  do  not  read 
history  in  that  way.  The  great  Churchmen  of  the 
past  did  not  wait  until  they  had  a  vast  gathering 
behind  them,  before  thev  ventured  to  bear  witness 
to  the  truth,  and  to  condemn  heresy.  The  heresy 
of  Arius  was  branded  by  one  brave  Bishop  long 
before  it  came  before  a  general  council,  and  if  he 
had  not  taken  action,  the  council  would  probably 
never  have  spoken  at  all.  So  it  was  with  all  the 
ancient  heresies.  The  watchmen  of  the  Church, 
bravely  spoke  the  truth  concerning  them  as  soon 
as  they  appeared,  and  it  was  the  appeal  from  their 
condemnation  that  was  determined  by  the  great 
Councils  of  the  Church.  It  is  time  for  our  Bish- 
ops to  supplement  the  statement  of  our  Church 
that  Rome  is  outside  the  Communion  of  this 
Church.  What  is  their  decision  concerning  the 
Tridentine  decrees  ?  What  is  their  mind  with  re- 
gard to  the  Immaculate  Conception,  and  the  Papal 
Infallibility?  Rome  tells  men  they  must  believe 
these  things  and  if  anyone  will  not  do  so,  let  him 
be  Anathema.  Is  this  teaching  true,  or  is  Rome  a 
false  witness,  on  whom  has  been  sent  a  strong  de- 
lusion that  she  should  believe  a  lie  ? 

We  wait  for  our  Bishops  to  speak,  and  mean- 


The  Re-confirmation  of  Romanists.         225 

while  let  every  priest,  on  whom  the  Church  has 
placed  the  responsibility  of  determining  what  per- 
sons are  fit  to  be  confirmed,  see  that  all  converts 
from  Rome  are  reconciled  to  the  Church  by  the  an- 
cient Catholic  custom  of  Confirmation. 
Very  respectfully, 

J.  D.  MORRISON. 
St.  John's  Rectory,  Ogdensburg, 

September  13th,  1894. 


[the  end.] 


